Skip to main content

Full text of "The lilac;"

See other formats


&8BBJ& 



E#QQQ#4Jfi 



--»BflB liH 












IP 




iils& 




J QgihQoiMRxO 



PRKS 








^kSSSvitmm^ 



88S 



mis 



m 




9HSSt 




v-^'to. 




&&. Q0, 






hbl, stxf 



3 T1S3 DDSa^Mflb 5 



OK 495.L65M3 
Lilac; 






VJ1 






THE LILAC 

A MONOGRAPH 



^ 9 ~* ■ o ■■ 

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 

MIW YORK • BOSTON • CHICAGO • DALLAS 
ATLANTA • SAN FRANCISCO 

MACMILLAN & CO.. Limited 

LONDON • BOMBAY • CALCUTTA 
MELBOURNE 

THE MACMILLAN CO. OP CANADA, Ltd. 

TORONTO 




< 
•J 

I— I 

►J 

W 
H 



THE LILAC 



A MONOGRAPH 



BY 

SUSAN DELANO McKELVEY 



ILLUSTRATED WITH ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-TWO 
HALF-TONE PLATES AND WITH FOUR COLOR CHARTS 



Jleto fiorfe 

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 

1928 

All rights reserved 




Copyright, 1928, 
By THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. 



Set up and printed. Published Deecmber, 1928. 



Printed in the United States of America by 

THE FERRIS PRINTING COMPANY, NEW YORK 



TO 



"THE PROFESSOR' 



PREFACE 

The subject of this monograph was suggested some years ago by Professor 
Charles Sprague Sargent and during his lifetime he did everything possible to 
further its completion. All who knew him can realize what his assistance meant 
and how great was the value of his advice. 

While the work was principally done at the Arnold Arboretum where the library, 
herbarium and collection of living plants offered unusual advantages for study, 
many similar sources of information have been utilized elsewhere. The author has 
visited the collections of Lilacs at Rochester, New York, at the Dominion of 
Canada Central Experimental Farm, Ottawa, at Mr. Theodore A. Havemeyer's, 
Glen Head, New York, and, although at a poor season of the year, has seen the 
plants growing at Mr. Emile Lemoine's, Nancy, France; at the Royal Botanic 
Gardens, Kew; and at the Jardin des Plantes, Paris; numerous nurseries have also 
been visited. She has examined the herbarium material at Kew, at the Museum 
d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, and at the Gray Herbarium of Harvard University. 
Specimens of unusual interest have been forwarded for examination from Kew, 
the British Museum, the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, and from the Magyar 
Nemzeti Muzeum, Budapest. From the Museo Botanico, Florence, Italy, Dr. 
Pampanini contributed fragments and photographs of all the Pere Giraldi collec- 
tions. Certain doubtful plants have been examined on her behalf by such author- 
ities as Mr. C. K. Schneider, Mr. C. E. C. Fischer, and others. 

The Lilac is first mentioned, so far as the author has been able to ascertain, in 
1554 by Pierre Belon in his " Observations." From this starting point the herbals 
and early botanical literature have been searched and the more important mono- 
graphs, botanies, floras, horticultural and botanical journals existing in the litera- 
ture of England, the United States, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Austria, 
Hungary, Russia and Japan, examined; catalogues of well-known nurserymen in 
many of these countries have, where available, been studied, and of these a valuable 
collection exists in the library of the Massachusetts Horticultural Society; cor- 
respondence with such growers as, in the United States, the late Mr. John Dunbar; 
in France, Mr. Emile Lemoine (Nancy) and Mr. A. Gouchault (Orleans) ; in Ger- 
many the firms of L. Spath (Berlin), Wilhelm Pfitzer (Stuttgart) and Victor 
Teschendorf! (Dresden); in Switzerland, Otto Froebels Erben (Zurich); and in 
Holland, Felix and Dykhuis, M. Koster and Sons and C. B . van Nes (all of Boskoop) , 
as well as with many others, has served to verify the origin and description of 
numerous garden forms. Information in regard to living specimens of peculiar 
interest has been sought and where possible the plant has been visited. Much 
literature has been searched, fruitlessly alas, in an effort to discover when the 

vii 



viii PREFACE 

Lilac was first introduced into the United States. A great amount of information 
has been obtained from various persons of experience in growing the Lilac both in 
this country and abroad in regard to the conditions considered favorable or un- 
favorable to the plant's success, as well as to the best methods of propagation.. 

While from the point of view of conciseness a certain amount of the information 
obtained from the aforementioned and other sources might have been deleted, it 
has been felt that by its retention the task of some future monographer of the 
genus might be considerably lessened. 

No radical departure has been made from the classification of the species 
adopted by recent writers. The author believes variability in pubescence to be 
characteristic of the genus. In most species, to a greater or lesser degree, pubes- 
cence is present, the amount varying, sometimes on the same plant, with the season 
of the year or with the age of the specimen. In certain species, represented by a 
number of examples, pubescent and glabrous forms connected by intermediate 
plants impossible to classify strictly speaking as either glabrous or pubescent have 
been found. Acting upon this evidence some new combinations have been neces- 
sary. Certain species here retained are little known and when better understood 
their number may be reduced. Certain others, while differing greatly in appear- 
ance as cultivated plants, are not easily distinguishable in herbarium material 
and the greater the number of examples studied, the more pronounced appears to 
be their botanical similarity. Here again more familiarity both with cultivated 
and spontaneous examples may permit of some reductions. 

The Common Lilac (Syringa vulgaris) has been cultivated for so many years 
that from it many garden forms have been evolved. For the grower to obtain in- 
formation in regard to these it has been necessary, as inquiry of the Arnold Arbore- 
tum has abundantly demonstrated, to apply to some botanical institution or per- 
sonally to search through catalogues and periodicals. To many persons such 
literature was not available, and furthermore no book of reference existed from 
which one might learn, certainly in so far as a majority of these plants were con- 
cerned, where such search should be made. Outside of large collections it is rare 
to find in cultivation more than a few Lilac species and a couple of the hybrids. 
The popular Lilac is the garden form. The species and hybrids have been well 
treated in such recent German writings as those of Mr. C. K. Schneider (191 1- 
191 2) and of Mr. A. Lingelsheim (1920) but these authors have made no attempt 
to do more than touch upon a few of the better-known garden forms. If the 
author of the present monograph has anything of especial value to offer to the 
nurseryman and garden owner it is, she believes, the information obtained in 
regard to these popular Lilacs. 

The difficulty of presenting the material assembled in regard to these has been 
noted in the introductory words to the garden forms of S. vulgaris and need not be 
repeated here. Where garden Lilacs of other species and hybrids exist the same 
obstacles have been encountered. 



PREFACE ix 

Descriptions of the color of the Lilac flower throughout this book have been 
based upon Mr. Robert Ridgway's "Color Standards and Color Nomenclature" 
(A. Hoen and Company, Baltimore, Maryland). Since the color terminology used 
was meaningless apart from Mr. Ridgway's plates it was felt that by the inclusion 
of charts conforming to the colors cited, the descriptions would be readily under- 
standable. Great appreciation must be expressed to Mr. Ridgway for permission 
to include these colors, and to Messrs. A. Hoen and Company for their careful work 
in making the charts. 

In the descriptions of the Lilac flower the number of Mr. Ridgway's plate, in 
Roman numerals and between parentheses, follows the capitalized name or names 
appearing on that plate. The original numbering is followed in the charts. As 
noted in the introductory words to the forms of S. vulgaris the difficulty of describing 
the color of a Lilac flower has been great because of a rapid change in color after 
the flower has been expanded for only a short time. The flower should be compared 
with the charts when only a few flowers on a cluster are opened for it is then that 
their color is freshest. The descriptions of the flower-bud and of the newly ex- 
panded flower were taken at this stage of development and comparison with the 
plates was made in shade, not in sunlight. 

All the photographs reproduced in this book with the exception of four were 
taken by Mr. George W. Root of West Roxbury, Massachusetts. Where detail is 
desired a time exposure is necessary and for the length of the exposure no motion 
should take place in the object. What to the ordinary observer may appear to be 
a quiet day, to the photographer may prove quite otherwise. To Mr. Root's 
skill — and patience — is due their excellence. 

The author wishes to thank those persons whose chapters have contributed to 
the value of this book, all who have permitted her to examine herbarium material 
and living collections or have loaned specimens and books, as well as the many 
correspondents who have replied, often in longhand and at great length, to her 
inquiries. 

She welcomes this opportunity to express to Professor Oakes Ames her appre- 
ciation of the privilege of working at the Arnold Arboretum where from each 
member of the staff she has received help in some form. In especial measure is 
she indebted to two persons, — Mr. Ernest H. Wilson and Mr. Alfred Rehder. 
Mr. Wilson has read the manuscript, contributed to its content and on innumerable 
occasions given valuable advice. Mr. Rehder has prepared the key, read the 
manuscript, corrected the proof-sheets and assisted with the index; his help has 
been unfailingly given for more than six years and to him the author and any who 
may find this monograph of value are in great measure obligated. 

1 60 Riverway Susan Delano McKelvey 

Boston, Massachusetts 
July, 1928 



CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Preface vii 

List of Plates xiii 

History and Distribution. By Ernest H. Wilson, A.M i 

Description of the Genus and Its Sections with a Key to the Species. By- 
Alfred Render, A.M 7 

Enumeration and Description of Species and Varieties 15 

Excluded and Doubtful Names 509 

Culture. By Theodore A. Havemeyer 517 

Propagation and Pruning 522 

Forcing 535 

Diseases and Insect PESTS.^By William T. Councilman, M.D 549 

Additions 557 

Index of Names 565 



XI 



LIST OF PLATES 



i. 

ii. 

in. 

IV. 

v. 

VI. 

VII. 

VIII. 

IX. 

X. 

XI. 

XII. 

XIII. 

XIV. 

XV. 

XVI. 

XVII. 

XVIII. 

XIX. 

XX. 

XXI. 

XXII. 

XXIII. 

XXIV. 

XXV. 

XXVI. 

XXVII. 

XXVIII. 

XXIX. 

XXX. 

XXXI. 

XXXII. 

XXXIII. 

XXXIV. 

XXXV. 

XXXVI. 

XXXVII. 

XXXVIII. 

XXXIX. 



"The Lilac" Frontispiec e 

Syringa emodi Preceding page 

S. emodi 

S. emodi 

S. emodi 

S. emodi 

S. yunnanensis 29 

S. yunnanensis 29 

S. yunnanensis 29 

S. yunnanensis 29 

S. yunnanensis 29 

S. Josikaea 33 

S. Josikaea 33 

S. Josikaea 33 

S. Josikaea 33 

S. Josikaea 33 

S. Wolfi 63 

S. Wolfi 63 

S. Wolfi 63 

S. Wolfi 63 

S. Wolfi 63 

S. reflexa 71 

S. reflexa 71 

S. reflexa 71 

S. reflexa 71 

S. reflexa 71 

S. reflexa 71 

S. reflexa 71 

S. reflexa 71 

S. Komarowi 75 

S. Komarowi 75 

S. Komarowi 75 



S. Komarowi 
S. Komarowi 
S. villosa 
S. villosa 
S. villosa 
S. villosa 
S. villosa 
S. villosa 



75 

75 
81 

81 

81 

81 

81 

81 



XUl 



XIV 



LIST OF PLATES 



XL. 

XLI. 

XLII. 

XLIII. 

XLIV. 

XLV. 

XLVI. 

XLVII. 

XLVIII. 

XLIX. 

L. 

LI. 

LIL 

Lin. 

LIV. 

LV. 

LVL 

LVII. 

LVIII. 

LIX. 

LX. 

LXI. 

LXII. 

LXIII. 

LXIV. 

LXV. 

LXVI. 

LXVIL 

LXVIII. 

LXIX. 

LXX. 

LXXI. 

LXXII. 

LXXIII. 

LXXIV. 

LXXV. 

LXXVI. 

LXXVII. 

LXXVIII. 

LXXIX. 

LXXX. 

LXXXI. 

LXXXII. 

LXXXIII. 

LXXXIV. 

LXXXV. 



S. Henryi "Lutece" Preceding page 

S. Henryi "Lutece" 

S. Henryi "Lutece" 

S. Henryi "Lutece" 

S. Henryi "Lutece" 

S. Prestoniae "Isabella" 

S. Prestoniae "W. T. Macoun" 

S. Prestoniae 

S. tomentella 

S. tomentella 

S. tomentella 

S. tomentella 

S. tomentella 

S. tomentella 

S. tomentella 

S. Sweginzowii 

S. Sweginzowii 

S. Sweginzowii 

S. Sweginzowii 

S. Sweginzowii 

S. Sweginzowii 

S. Julianae 

S. Julianae 

S. Julianae • 

S. Julianae 

S. Julianae 

S. Julianae 

S. velutina 

S. velutina 

S. velutina 

S. velutina 

S. velutina 

S. velutina 

S. velutina 

S. microphylla . 

S. microphylla 

S. microphylla 

S. microphylla 

S. microphylla 

S. microphylla 

S. pubescens 

S. pubescens 

S. pubescens 

S. pubescens 

S. pubescens 

S. pubescens 



99 
99 
99 
99 

99 
109 
109 
109 
115 
"5 
115 
115 
"5 
"5 

"5 
123 

123 

123 

123 

123 

123 

131 
131 
131 
J3 1 
131 
J 3i 
*35 
135 
i35 
135 
i35 
i35 
135 
151 
iSi 
151 
151 
151 
iSi 
i59 
i59 
159 
159 
i59 
159 



LIST OF PLATES 



XV 



LXXXVI. 


s. 


LXXXVII. 


s. 


LXXXVIIL 


s. 


LXXXIX. 


s. 


XC. 


s. 


XCI. 


s. 


XCII. 


s. 


XCIII. 


s. 


XCIV. 


s. 


XCV. 


s. 


XCVI. 


s. 


XCVII. 


s. 


XCVIII. 


s. 


XCIX. 


s. 


c. 


s. 


CI. 


s. 


en. 


s. 


cm. 


s. 


CIV. 


s. 


cv. 


s. 


CVI. 


s. 


CVII. 


s. 


CVIII. 


s. 


CIX. 


s. 


ex. 


s. 


CXI. 


s. 


CXII. 


s. 


CXIII. 


s. 


CXIV. 


s. 


cxv. 


s. 


CXVI. 


s. 


CXVII. 


s. 


CXVIII. 


s. 


CXIX. 


s. 


cxx. 


s. 


CXXI. 


s. 


CXXII. 


s. 


CXXIII. 


s. 


CXXIV. 


s. 


exxv. 


s. 


CXXVI. 


s. 


CXXVII. 


s. 


CXXVIII. 


s. 


CXXIX. 


s. 


CXXX. 


s. 


CXXXI. 


s. 



Meyeri Preceding page 169 

Meyeri 169 

Meyeri 169 

Meyeri 169 

Meyeri 169 

Meyeri 169 

oblata 175 

oblata 175 

oblata 175 

oblata var. Giraldii 175 

oblata var. Giraldii 175 

oblata var. Giraldii 175 

oblata var. Giraldii 175 

oblata var. Giraldii 175 

oblata var. dilatata 175 

oblata var. dilatata 175 

oblata var. dilatata 175 

oblata var. dilatata 175 

oblata var. dilatata 175 

oblata var. dilatata 175 

oblata var. dilatata 175 

hyacinthiflora 193 

hyacinthiflora 193 

hyacinthiflora 193 

hyacinthiflora 193 

hyacinthiflora 193 

hyacinthiflora "Lamartine" 193 

hyacinthiflora "Lamartine" 193 

hyacinthiflora "Vauban" 193 

hyacinthiflora "Mirabeau" 193 

hyacinthiflora "Descartes" 193 

hyacinthiflora "Lamartine" 193 

hyacinthiflora "Lamartine" 193 

vulgaris 201 

vulgaris 201 

vulgaris 201 

vulgaris 201 

vulgaris 201 

vulgaris "Amethyst" 201 

vulgaris "Diderot" 201 

vulgaris "Mme. F. Morel" 201 

vulgaris "Mme. F. Morel" 201 

vulgaris "Vestale" 201 

vulgaris "Christophe Colomb" 201 

vulgaris "Lemoinei" 201 

vulgaris "Due de Massa" 201 



XVI 



LIST OF PLATES 



CXXXII. S. vulgaris "Marlyensis pallida" Preceding page 201 

CXXXIII. S. vulgaris "Christophe Colomb" 2 oi 

CXXXIV. S. chinensis f. Saugeana 4 OI 

CXXXV. S. chinensis f. Saugeana 40I 

CXXXVI. S. chinensis f. Saugeana 401 

CXXXVII. S. chinensis f. alba 40I 

CXXXVIII. S. chinensis . .' 401 

CXXXIX. S. chinensis f. alba 4 OI 

CXL. S. persica var. laciniata 433 

CXLI. S. persica var. laciniata 433 

CXLIL S. persica var. laciniata 433 

CXLIII. S. persica 433 

CXLIV. S. persica var. laciniata 433 

CXLV. S. persica var. laciniata 433 

CXL VI. S. persica 433 

CXL VII. S. persica var. laciniata 433 

CXL VIII. S. persica 433 

CXLIX. S. pinnatifolia 469 

CL. S. pinnatifolia 469 

CLI. S. pinnatifolia 469 

CLII. S. pinnatifolia 469 

CLIII. S. pinnatifolia 469 

CLIV. S. pinnatifolia 469 

CLV. S. amurensis 473 

CLVI. S. amurensis 473 

CLVII. S. amurensis 473 

CLVIII. S. amurensis 473 

CLLX. S. amurensis 473 

CLX. S. amurensis var. japonica 473 

CLXI. S. amurensis var. japonica 473 

CLXII. S. amurensis var. japonica 473 

CLXIII. S. amurensis var. japonica 473 

CLXIV. S. amurensis var. japonica 473 

CLXV. S. amurensis var. japonica 473 

CLXVI. S. pekinensis 491 

CLXVII. S. pekinensis 491 

CLXVIII. S. pekinensis 491 

CLXIX. S. pekinensis 491 

CLXX. S. pekinensis 491 

CLXXI. S. pekinensis 491 

Note. None of the plates here given appeared previously with eight exceptions. Plates 
XXXI., LI., LXIIL, LXXXIL, LXXXVIIL, and CLII., through a misunderstanding on the 
part of the Editor, were published without permission in Gartenschdnheit (vm. 141, 1927); 
the explanation for their reproduction in this periodical is given by Mr. Schneider (Garten- 
schonheit, viii. 332, 1927). Plate XXXVI. appeared, also without permission, in Breck's cata- 
logue, "Trees, Plants, Planting" (1927, 14); the explanation for its reproduction is similar to 
that given by Mr. Schneider. Plate XLVII. I published in Horticulture in 1927. 



HISTORY AND DISTRIBUTION 

BY 

Ernest H. Wilson, A.M. 



Lilacs are an Old World group of shrubs and small trees confined with two ex- 
ceptions to Asia and have no representative in the New World. All the species are 
continental but one variety of the Tree Lilac (Syringa amurensis var. japonica) is 
found on the islands of Japan, and 5. velutina occurs on Dagelet Island in the Japan 
Sea. Their distribution is very similar to that of the closely related genus Ligustrum 
(Privet) which, however, is represented in Japan by a number of species. Of the 
twenty-eight species of Lilac recognized in this work, two (S. vulgaris and S. 
Josikaea) are found in central and southeastern Europe; two (S. emodi and S. 
afghanica) occur on the Himalayas; two species (S. velutina and 5. Wolfi) of true 
Lilacs, together with the variety dilatata of S. oblata and two Tree Lilacs (S. 
amurensis and S. Fauriei) are indigenous in Korea and six species of true Lilacs 
together with two varieties and the Tree Lilac (S. pekinensis) are found in northern 
China. The remaining fourteen are peculiar to western China. From this analysis 
it would appear that western China is the headquarters of the genus but in this 
connection it must be remembered that a number of the species from that region 
are little known and when properly understood it may be necessary to reduce the 
number. 

A few species have a wide distribution but the greater number are very local. 
The most widely distributed species are the Tree Lilacs, S. amurensis and 5. 
pekinensis. The first-named is found as a large bush or small tree throughout the 
greater part of the Korean peninsula, adjacent Manchuria and in the region 
bordering the Amur River to the northward. It reappears on the mountains of 
Japan in the variety japonica, being found from Shinano province in central Hondo 
northward, and is abundant in Hokkaido where trees forty-five feet tall are not un- 
common. The typical S. amurensis was the first of the Tree Lilacs introduced into 
cultivation, being sent by R. Maack about 1857 to St. Petersburg. Seeds of the var. 
japonica were sent from Sapporo by William S. Clark to the Massachusetts Agricul- 
tural College and to the Arnold Arboretum in 1876. The other species (S. pekinensis) 
appears to grow wild on the mountains in the vicinity of Peking and westward to 
the Kansu-Tibetan borderland. This was introduced into cultivation in 1880 by 
seeds which Dr. Bretschneider sent to the Jardin des Plantes, Paris. The most 
widely distributed of the true Lilacs is the north China S. oblata, which is found 
from the provinces of Shensi and northern Hupeh eastward to Korea. The plant 
which bears the name of S. oblata was brought in 1856 from a garden in Shanghai 
to England by Robert Fortune. Its exact counterpart has not been found wild 
but its only slightly different variety Giraldii was discovered in 189 1 in the province 
of Shensi and was brought into cultivation before 1903. The white-flowered 
variety affinis has been cultivated in Peking gardens for we know not how long. 
Seeds were received at the Jardin des Plantes, Paris, in 1880 and the plant flowered 



4 THE LILAC 

there for the first time in 189 1. In America its introduction would appear to have 
been through seeds sent in 1904 to the Arnold Arboretum by Mr. E. T. Williams. 
Yet a third variety, dilatata, is found on the Palaeozoic shales and mud-slates in 
central Korea. This was introduced into cultivation in 191 7 through seeds which 
E. H. Wilson sent to the Arnold Arboretum. 

The species which appear to be most local in their distribution are S. Fauriei, 
a mysterious plant known only from the Diamond Mountains in northeastern 
Korea, and the little known 5. buxifolia reported from one locality in Kansu, 
northwestern China. Neither of these are in cultivation. The tiny principality 
of Mupin and the adjacent forested regions is the home of the anomalous S. 
pinnatifolia, which was introduced into cultivation in 1904 by E. H. Wilson. 

In northern China, S. oblata in one or other of its varieties has been cultivated 
from immemorial time. We know not when the Common Lilac (S. vulgaris) was 
first brought into cultivation in Europe, but it was taken from Constantinople 
probably to Vienna not later than 1563 and in 1629 both the white and lilac-colored 
forms were cultivated in England. Another Lilac, long a favorite among Asiatic 
peoples and which must have been known from early times, is the so-called Persian 
Lilac (S. persica). The fact that its name is a geographical misnomer indicates 
the long period of time in which it has been cultivated. For a couple of centuries 
and more it was assumed to be native to Persia. It was not until 191 5 that the 
true home of this Lilac was made known. This proved to be on mountain slopes 
of southern and southeastern Kansu. It is interesting to note that the region is 
traversed by one of the two great highways which the ancients used to journey 
across the heart of Asia. It was over this road that merchandise to and from 
Persia was carried in the earliest days. It was over this road that the Walnut, 
Grapevine and Muskmelon were brought into China. It was over this same road 
that the Peach and the Apricot, with silk, musk and rhubarb were carried to Persia 
and the shores of the Caspian Sea. It is probable also that the Persian Lilac was 
carried over this highway from Kansu to the flower-loving people of Persia. It is 
now naturalized on the hillslopes in Persia but no botanist has found it wild in that 
land. In 1620 the cut-leafed form of the species was known to be in cultivation in 
gardens at Venice. In 1672 the two forms, that with cut leaves and that with 
entire leaves, were separated and given distinct names. The Persian Lilac is 
then the greatest wanderer of all the species. It is interesting also as being, with 
the Common Lilac, parent of the first hybrid Lilac, S. chinensis, better known as 
S. rothomagensis, which appeared in the Botanical Garden at Rouen about 1777. 
Today this remains the handsomest of all the hybrid Lilacs. It may at first seem 
strange that the home of such a popular and well-known plant as the Persian Lilac 
has only just become known, but in this connection it must be remembered that 
China is a vast country and one in which travel is difficult and slow. It is only 
since the dawn of the twentieth century that our gardens have begun to enjoy the 
wealth of flowers which have their home in central and western China. 



HISTORY AND DISTRIBUTION 5 

Those surprised to learn that the home of the Persian Lilac has only recently 
become known will be equally astonished to learn that the native land of the Com- 
mon Lilac was unknown before 1828 when it was reported from Banat in western 
Rumania. In 1841 it was found on the mountains of Bulgaria. In the autumn of 
1905 Monsieur Maurice de Vilmorin received seeds collected from wild plants in 
Bulgaria which he divided with the Arnold Arboretum, where plants raised from 
them are growing to this day. From the evidence that has been collected on the geo- 
graphical distribution of the Common Lilac it would appear to be confined to the 
mountains of the Balkan Peninsula. 

The second European species known as the Hungarian Lilac (S. Josikaed) is 
widely distributed on the Carpathian Mountains and on the mountains of Transyl- 
vania. This has been in cultivation since about 1827 or 1828 but has never been a 
very popular species. Its chief fame rests on it being part parent of the 5. Henryi 
race of hybrids. These hybrids, which resulted from the crossing of this Hungarian 
species with the Chinese S. villosa, are best represented by the form Lutece. 

The west Himalayan S. afghanica is little known and appears to be confined to 
the arid slopes and the valleys of Afghanistan. It so singularly resembles the 
entire-leafed variety of the Persian Lilac that it has been mistaken for that plant. 
Indeed, it may be merely a naturalized condition of the Persian Lilac with thicker 
leaves induced by the dryer ecological conditions obtaining in Afghanistan. It 
could easily have been carried across the mountains from Persia. The other 
Himalayan species, 5. emodi, is more widely distributed along the mountain range* 
Like its near relatives, S. villosa, S. Wolfi and 5. Josikaea, this is a woodland plant 
enjoying the cool of forest glades and margin of woodland streams. 

In central and western China, Lilacs, while not exactly common plants, are 
fairly frequent by the side of streams, in thickets and on the margins of woodland, 
always in regions where they enjoy an abundance of moisture. Under such con- 
ditions S. Julianae, introduced into cultivation in 1901, and S. reflexa, introduced 
in the same year, occur on the mountains of Hupeh and eastern Szechuan. In 
western Szechuan S. Komarowi and S. tomentella are locally quite common shrubs- 
being found in the mountains from 5000 to 10,000 feet above sea-level. S. tomen- 
tella, which delights in the more upland thickets, was introduced into cultivation 
in 1905. S. Komarowi, introduced in 1910, like its very close relative, S. reflexa, 
frequents margins of woodland or the border of woodland streams. Gardens owe 
the above four Lilacs to E. H. Wilson, who collected the seeds in the years men- 
tioned. On the uplands around Sungpan ting, a physiologically dry region, S. 
Sweginzowii occurs but is not common. It was discovered and introduced about 
1894 either by G. N. Potanin or M. M. Berezovski to St. Petersburg. In south- 
western Kansu and in the arid and subarid valleys of northwestern Szechuan, S. 
Potanini has its home. This was discovered in 1893 by Potanin and introduced 
into cultivation by E. H. Wilson in 1905. 

The Yunnan species, S. pinetorum, S. Wardii and S. rugulosa, from their general 



6 THE LILAC 

appearance, probably enjoy similar climatic conditions to 5. Potanini, whereas 
S. yunnanensis, from its relationship to S. emodi, is evidently a woodland plant. 
Western Yunnan is largely limestone and its four Lilacs, like the majority of its 
plants, are local in their distribution. In 1906, 5. yunnanensis was introduced 
into cultivation by G. Forrest but it was discovered by Pere Delavay in 1886 in 
the neighborhood of Tali fu. In 1913, F. Kingdon Ward discovered 5. Wardii 
and the following year S. pinetorum. The fourth species, S. rugulosa, has not yet 
been introduced into cultivation. I am not sure that the real S. pinetorum is in 
cultivation. All the living material I have seen bearing this name is referable to 
S. yunnanensis. 

Of the seven species that are found in northern China, S. buxifolia has been 
reported only from Kansu and is not in cultivation. S. Giraldiana has been found 
only in Shensi and this, too, has not been introduced. S. Meyeri is based on material 
sent from a Chinese garden at Peking and has not yet been reported in a wild state. 
It was introduced into gardens in 1908 by the late F. N. Meyer. S. microphylla 
appears to be widely distributed in the north central province of Shensi, adjacent 
Kansu and southward to northern Honan, apparently keeping to the valley of 
the Yellow River. This pleasing plant was introduced into cultivation by William 
Purdom who sent seeds to Messrs. Veitch in 1910 and from whom the Arnold 
Arboretum received plants in 191 3. S. pubescens is native of the mountains beyond 
Peking whence seeds were sent by Dr. Bretschneider to the Jardin des Plantes in 
1880; from the same source the Arnold Arboretum received seeds in 1882. Of 
S. oblata and its varieties we have already spoken. The remaining species, 5. 
villosa, is the oldest known of the Chinese Lilacs, having been collected about the 
middle of the eighteenth century by Pere d'Incarville on Po hua shan, a mountain 
immediately to the west of Peking. It was, however, not introduced into cultivation 
until sometime between 1879 and 1882 when Dr. Bretschneider sent seeds to Europe 
and to the Arnold Arboretum. 

A fairly common plant in the woodlands and forest glades of central and northern 
Korea is S. Wolfi and it probably occurs also in adjacent forests of Manchuria. 
It was introduced into the Botanic Gardens at St. Petersburg, presumably by 
seeds collected by Komarov in northern Korea. The same botanist, in all prob- 
ability, introduced S. velutina, a species even more widely distributed in Korea, 
being abundant in open woods and thickets on the Diamond Mountains and 
elsewhere. It has been grown in the Arnold Arboretum since 1902. A pleasing 
plant in many ways, its sweetly fragrant blossoms in early summer fill the woods 
with a delightful odor. It is remarkable as being the only true Lilac found outside 
of continental areas. As mentioned earlier it grows on Dagelet Island, a small 
islet in the Japan Sea, where occur a curious admixture of Korean and Japanese 
plants. Since the Lilac is so widely spread in the Orient it is very remarkable 
that no true Lilac grows wild in Japan. 



DESCRIPTION OF THE GENUS AND ITS SECTIONS 
WITH A KEY TO THE SPECIES 

BY 

Alfred Rehder, A.M. 



SYRINGA 

Syringa Linnaeus [Syst. (1735) ; ed. n. 16 (1740) ; Hort. Cliff. 6 (1737) ; Gen. PL 3 (1737) ;] 
Spec. PI. 9 (17 53). — Murray, Syst. Veg. 55 (1774). — Gaertner, Fruct. 1. 229, t. 49(1788). — 
Necker, El. Bot. n. 5 (1790). — Willdenow, Spec. PI. 1. 48 (1797). — Roemer and Schultes, 
Syst. Veg. 1. 76 (1817). — Reichenbach, Consp. 134 (1828). — Koch, Syn. Fl. Germ. 
482 (1837). — G. Don,»Gen. Syst. iv. 51 (1837). — Endlicher, Gen. PI. 1. 573 (1838). — 
Spach, Hist. Nat. Veg. vrn. 279 (1839). — De Candolle, Prodr. vni. 282 (1844). — K. 
Koch, Dendr. n. pt. 1. 264 (1872). — Bentham and Hooker, Gen. PI. n. 675 (1873). — 
Boissier, Fl. Orient, rv. 38 (1879). — Baillon, Hist. PI. xi. 249 (1892). — Knoblauch in 
Engler and Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. rv. pt. n. 7 (1892), exclud. sect. Sarcocarpion. — 
Schneider, HI. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 771 (191 1). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 
243, pt. 1-11, 74 (1920). — Bailey, Man. Cult. PI. 597 (1924). — Rehder, Man. Cult. 
Trees and Shrubs, 751 (1927). — Hegi, Fl. Mittel-Eur. v. pt. m. 1908 (1927). 

Lilac [Tournefort, Inst. 601, pi. 372 (1700). — ] Adanson, Fam. Nat. PI. n. 223 (1763). — 
Lamarck, Fl. Franc. 11. 305 (1778). — Jussieu, Gen. PI. 105 (1789). — Moench, 
Meth. 430 (1794). — Grenier and Godron, Fl. France, 11. 473 (1850). 

Liliacum Renault, Fl. Dep. Orne, 100 (1800). 

Ligustrina Ruprecht, Beitr. Prlanzenk. Russ. Reich, xi. 55 (1859). — Maximowicz in 
Bull. Acad. Sci. St. Petersb. xx. 432 (Diagn. PI. Nov. xix.) (1875); in Mel. Biol. 

ix. 395 (1875)- 
Pre-Linnean literature and synonyms see under Syringa vulgaris. 

Homonym 
Syringa [Tournefort, Inst. 617, pi. 389 (1700). — ] Adanson, Fam. Nat. PI. n. 244 

(1763). — Moench, Meth. 678 (1794) = Philadelphus Linnaeus. 

Deciduous shrubs or small trees; branchlets terete to four-angled, with solid pith; 
winter-buds with several pairs of outer imbricate scales, glabrous or pubescent, the 
terminal bud often wanting; leaf scars with a compound transverse bun die- trace. Leaves 
opposite, petioled, rarely subsessile, orbicular-ovate to lanceolate, rarely nearly linear, 
undivided, rarely lobed or pinnate, entire, with 3-7 pairs of veins. Flowers perfect, 
sessile or pedicelled, in terminal or lateral panicles, with or after the leaves; calyx small, 
campanulate, 4-toothed or nearly truncate, persistent; corolla salver-shaped with cylin- 
dric or narrowly funnel-shaped tube and 4 valvate more or less spreading lobes; stamens 
2, inserted on the tube of the corolla near or above the middle; ovary 2-celled, with 2 
pendulous ovules in each cell; style filiform, included, shorter than stamens, with 2-lobed 
stigma. Fruit an oblong or ovoid- to obovoid-oblong capsule, leathery, compressed, 2- 
celled, loculicidal; seeds in each cell 2, oblong, compressed, narrowly winged, albuminous. 

The genus belongs to the family of Oleaceae and forms with the genera Forsythia 
Vahl and Schrebera Roxburgh the tribe Syringeae differing from all other Oleaceae 



10 THE LILAC 

in its capsular loculicidal fruit with winged seeds; the genus Forsythia is easily 
distinguished from Syringa by the yellow, axillary and fascicled precocious flowers 
with imbricate corolla-lobes and by the lamellate or evanescent pith of the branch- 
lets, while the genus Schrebera differs in the 4-8-merous flowers with the valvate 
corolla-lobes bearded inside and in its exalbuminous seeds. All three genera have 
the peculiarity that they contain species with undivided and with lobed or pinnate 
leaves, the latter being the exception in Syringa, but in Schrebera pinnate leaves 
are the rule, while in Forsythia some species have only part of the leaves lobed or 
sometimes 3-parted. The flowers of the section Ligustrina bear a strong resem- 
blance to those of Ligustrum, but that genus is easily distinguished by its berry- 
like fruit. 

The species of Syringa are all closely related to each other and very similar in 
their general appearance. The most distinct group is the section Ligustrina 
established in 1857 by Ruprecht and distinguished by the very short corolla- tube. 
No subdivision of Eusyringa, the typical group, was attempted until Schneider in 
1910 distinguished the groups Villosae and Vulgares the latter with lateral, the 
former with terminal inflorescences, a character to which the writer had drawn 
attention about eight years earlier in the key to the species of Syringa in Bailey's 
Cyclopedia of American Horticulture (rv. 1762). The Vulgares group was again 
subdivided by Schneider into Euvulgares and Pubescentes. A third section, Sar- 
cocarpion, established by Franchet in 1886 and based on his new species Syringa 
sempervirens, was separated in 1916 by W. W. Smith as a distinct genus, Parasy- 
ringa, but Lingelsheim in 1920 referred the species to Ligustrum and four years 
later Mattfeld (in Bot. Jahrb. ldc. Beibl. 123, p. 69) made Sarcocarpion a section 
of Ligustrum with L. sempervirens as the only species, characterized by the tardily 
dehiscent endocarp of the berry-like fruit. 

Twenty-eight species of Syringa are recognized in this work; the last mono- 
grapher of the genus, Lingelsheim, described thirty species, but of these eight have 
been reduced here to synonymy, while six species not known to Lingelsheim have 
been added. The majority of the species is Chinese; in western China the genus 
reaches its greatest development and spreads from there to central and northeastern 
China, but it is not found in eastern China south of Honan. From northern China 
the genus extends eastward through Manchuria to Korea and northern Japan, west- 
ward into Tibet and southward to Afghanistan and the northwestern Himalaya. 
It appears again in the mountains of the Balkan peninsula. Judging from its dis- 
tribution the genus must have originated in Tertiary or pre-Tertiary times, but no 
fossil remains referable to it have been so far recorded. Also the distribution of 
its tropical counterpart, Schrebera, which is found in southern Asia, Africa and on 
the Andes of South America, speaks for a circumpolar area of the tribe during 
Tertiary times. 



DESCRIPTION OF THE GENUS 11 

THE SUBDIVISIONS OF SYRINGA 

Sect. i. Eusyringa K. Koch, Dendr. n. pt. i. 265 (1872), as subgen. — Dippel, Handb. 
Laubholzk. 1. 112 (1889), as subgen. — Knoblauch in Engler and Prantl, Pflanzenfam. 
iv. pt. 11. 8 (1892). — Koehne, Deutsch. Dendr. 499 (1893), as subgen. — Schneider, 111. 
Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 771 (191 1), as subgen. — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartnr- 
Zeit. xtv. 206 (1899), as subgen.; in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vr. 3300 (1917), as sect.; 
Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 751 (1927), as subgen. — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. 
iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 74 (1920). 

Corolla-tube exceeding the calyx, much longer than lobes; anthers included or ex- 
serted, only Yi longer than filaments; flowers lilac, purple, pink, or whitish to white. 

Series 1. vlllosae Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. ix. 80 (1910); HI. Handb. 
Laubholzk. n. 778 (1911), as sect. — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vr. 3300 (1917), 
as group; Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 751 (1927), as sect. — Lingelsheim in Engler, 
Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 75 (1920), as subsect. 

Inflorescence terminal on leafy branchlets, from the terminal bud of last year's 
branches; anthers yellow; odor of flowers usually not agreeable; fruit smooth or slightly 
warty. 

Nine species from the northwest Himalaya to northern China and east to Korea, also 
in southeastern Europe. Species 1-9. 

Series 2. vulgares Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. ix. 79 (1910); HI. Handb. 
Laubholzk. n. 772 (1911), as sect. — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. rv. 3300 (1917), 
as group; Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 751 (1927), as sect. — Lingelsheim in Engler, 
Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. i-h. 75 (1920), as subsect. 

Inflorescence without leaves at base, from lateral buds on last year's branches, the 
terminal bud normally wanting and replaced by two axillary buds; flowers usually very 
fragrant. 

Subseries A. Pubescentes Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. rx. 80 (1910); 111. 
Handb. Laubholzk. n. 772 (191 1), as subsect. — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, 
pt. 1-11. 87 (1920), as series. 

Leaves more or less pubescent, often densely so beneath, rarely nearly or quite gla- 
brous, without stomata on upper surface; inflorescence usually more or less pilose; flowers 
rather small, limb about x /i in. across; anthers yellow to bluish or violet; fruit warty or 
sometimes nearly smooth. 

Ten species from western China to central and through northern China east to Korea 
and the Dagelet Island. (Species 10-19.) 

Subseries B. Euvulgares Schneider, in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. ix. 80 (1910); 111. 
Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 772 (191 1), as subsect. — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 
243, pt. i-n. 87 (1920), as series. 

Leaves glabrous or sometimes on sterile shoots finely puberulous and ciliolate, with 
stomata on both sides, sometimes lobed or pinnate; inflorescence puberulous or glabrous; 
flowers rather large, limb about Y2 in. across; anthers yellow; fruit smooth. 

Six species from eastern Tibet through northern China east to Korea and also extend- 
ing into central China, in Afghanistan and in southeastern Europe. Species 20-25. 



12 THE LILAC 

Sect. II. Ligustrina Ruprecht in Bull. Phys. - Math. St. Petersb. xv. 371 (1857); 
in Mel. Biol. n. 551 (1857). — Maximowicz in Mem. Sav. Etr. Acad. Sci. St. Petersb. 
DC. 193 (Prim. Fl. Amur.) (1859). — K. Koch Dendr. n. pt. 1. 271 (1872), as subgen. — 
Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 117 (1889), as subgen. — Knoblauch in Engler and Prantl, 
Pflanzenfam. rv. pt. 11. 8 (1892). — Koehne, Deutsch. Dendr. 499 (1893), as subgen. — 
Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit xiv. 207 (1899), as subgen.; in Bailey, Stand. 
Cycl. Hort. vi. 3301 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 751 (1927), as subgen. — 
Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. rx. 82 (1910) ; HI. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 783 (1911), as 
subgen. — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 92 (1920). 

Ligustrina Ruprecht in Beitr. Pflanzenk. Russ. Reich, xi. 55 (1859). — Maximowicz in 
Bull. Acad. Sci. St. Petersb. xx. 432 (Diagn. PI. Nov. xix.) (1875); in Mel. Biol, 
ix. 395 (1875). 

Corolla-tube short, scarcely longer than calyx, shorter than lobes; anthers exserted on 
filaments longer than anthers, yellow; flowers white or creamy- white, their odor not 
agreeable; inflorescences from lateral buds, without leaves at base; fruit smooth. 

Three species from northwestern China to Korea and northern Japan. Species 26-28. 

KEY TO THE SPECIES 

A. Corolla-tube much longer than calyx; anthers subsessile, wholly or partly included. 
B. Panicles from terminal buds, leafy at base. 

C. Leaves papillose and glaucous and glabrous beneath. 

D. Anthers protruding half their length; leaves elliptic to oblong, 2-9 in. long, 
1-5 in. broad. 1. S. emodi, p. 17 

DD. Anthers not or slightly protruding; leaves elliptic-oblong to elliptic-lanceolate, 
1^-3 in. long, 3^-1 in. broad. 2. S. yunnanensis, p. 29 

CC. Leaves not papillose, green or glaucescent and usually pilose beneath at least along 
the midrib, rarely glabrous. 
D. Corolla-tube funnelform, gradually widened from about the middle, lobes 
more or less upright; anthers inserted below the mouth. 
E. Panicles upright. 

F. Leaves broad-elliptic to elliptic-oblong, 2-5 H in. long, glaucescent be- 
neath; anthers just above the middle of the tube; inflorescence pu- 
bescent. (See also X S. Henryi,p. 99 and X S. nanceiana, p. 107.) 

3. S. Josikaea, p. 33 
FF. Leaves elliptic-oblong to elliptic-lanceolate, 3-7 in. long, grayish green 
beneath; anthers inserted in the upper third of the tube; inflores- 
cence often pilose, sometimes glabrous. 4. S. Wolfi, p. 63 
EE. Panicles pendulous or nodding, dense. 

F. Flowers whitish or light buff inside, pink outside, carmine in bud, in 

usually pendulous slender panicles, 5-12 in. long. (See also X S. 

Prestoniae, p. 109.) 5. S. reflexa, p. 71 

FF. Flowers purple-pink, paler outside, in nodding compact cylindric 

panicles 2-6 in. long. 6. S. Komarowi, p. 75 

DD. Corolla- tube cylindric or nearly so, lobes spreading. 

E. Anthers reaching the mouth, slightly protruding; inflorescence with two 
pairs of leaves below. 



KEY TO THE SPECIES 13 

F. Inflorescence compact; flowers short-stalked; leaves acute at ends, 
iK -2 H hi. broad, glaucescent beneath and pilose only along the 
veins or nearly glabrous. (See also X 5. Eenryi, p. 99, X S. nan- 
ceiana, p. 107 and X S. Prestoniae, p. 109.) 7. S. villosa, p. 81 

FF. Inflorescence loose; flowers subsessile; leaves acute to acuminate, 
%-2 in. broad, soft-pubescent beneath, sometimes only on veins. 

8. S. tomentella, p. 115 
EE. Anthers below the mouth, not at all protruding; inflorescence loose, usu- 
ally with only one pair of small leaves below or none, often with addi- 
tional lateral inflorescences; leaves acuminate, pilose on veins near base 
beneath or glabrous. (See also X S. nanceiana, p. 107.) 

9. S. Sweginzowii, p. 123 
BB. Panicles from lateral buds, the terminal bud normally wanting. 

C. Leaves entire or sometimes partly lobed. 

D. Corolla about x /i in. in diameter; leaves pubescent at least on or near midrib 
beneath (glabrous in nos. 18 and 19); fruit warty or sometimes nearly 
smooth; winter-buds pubescent or puberulous (glabrous in no. 19). 

E. Anthers slightly below the mouth, equalling about H~H 0I> tube; branch- 
lets usually short-pubescent; leaves usually rather densely pubescent 
beneath and less so above. 
F. Anthers purple or grayish blue (unknown in no. 10); leaves up to 
4 in. long, acuminate; petiole TWA in. long. 

G. Leaves glaucescent beneath, pilose on veins; flowers unknown. 

10. S. Giraldiana, p. 129 

GG. Leaves densely gray-pubescent beneath, rarely glabrescent and 
pilose only on veins. 
H. Inflorescence short-pilose; pedicels short-pilose. 

11. S. Julianae, p. 131 
HH. Inflorescence puberulous; pedicels glabrescent. 

12. S. velutina, p. 135 

FF. Anthers yellow ; leaves not more than 2 Yi in. long; petiole x l\tr x A m - long. 
G. Leaves densely pubescent beneath. 

H. Leaves smooth above, thin; calyx glabrescent or pilose. 

13. S. Potanini, p. 144 
HH. Leaves wrinkled above, thickish; inflorescence including calyx 

densely gray-pilose. 14. S. rugulosa, p. 148 

GG. Leaves pilose only on veins beneath. 15. S. pinetorum, p. 149 

EE. Anthers above the middle of tube, much below the mouth, equalling about 

y 4 or y 5 of tube; branchlets glabrous to pubescent when young. 

F. Anthers purple or bluish; leaves K -2 /^ m . long, usually acuminate or 

acute, rarely obtuse. 

G. Corolla less than % in. long; flowers pale lilac; leaves pubescent 

beneath at least on veins near base. 16. S. microphylla, p. 151 

GG. Corolla H~iHs hi- long. 

H. Leaves pubescent beneath at least on veins near base; the 
two lower pairs of veins distant; flowers pale lilac; scales of 
winter-buds pubescent. 17. S. pubescens, p. 159 



14 THE LILAC 

HH. Leaves glabrous; the two lower pairs of veins close; flowers 
purple-lilac ; scales of winter-buds only ciliate. 

18. S. Meyeri, p. 169 
FF. Anthers yellow; leaves rotundate, Y%-\ in. long, obtuse or rarely 
short-acuminate, glabrous. 19. S. Wardii, p. 173 

DD. Corolla about J^ in. in diameter; anthers yellow; leaves glabrous or sometimes 
on sterile shoots ciliate or finely puberulous; branchlets glabrous; fruit 
smooth; winter-buds glabrous, rarely minutely puberulous. 
E. Leaves ovate or orbicular-ovate, acuminate, subcordate or truncate, rarely 
broad-cuneate at base. 
F. Leaves broad-ovate, coloring orange to purple in autumn; anthers 
slightly above the middle of tube. (See also X S. hyacinthiflora, 
p. 193.) 20. S. oblata, p. 175 

FF. Leaves ovate, remaining green in autumn; anthers just below throat. 
(See also X S. hyacinthiflora, p. 193 and X S. chinensis, p. 401.) 

21. S. vulgaris, p. 201 
EE. Leaves oblong-ovate to oblong-lanceolate, rarely elliptic or linear-oblong. 
F. Petiole V24-V5 in. long; leaves Yi-\ X A m - long) thickish, entire; inflo- 
rescence x A~iYi in. long. 
G. Leaves acute, rarely obtuse, ovate-lanceolate to linear-oblong. 

22. S. afghanica, p. 428 
GG. Leaves obtuse, elliptic to oblong-obovate. 23. S. buxifolia, p. 432 
FF. Petiole 1 / 5 - I /2in. long; leaves 1-23^ in. long, often partly lobed; inflo- 
rescence 2-3^ in. long. (See also X S. chinensis, p. 401.) 

24. S. persica, p. 433 

CC. Leaves pinnate, with 7-9 leaflets; panicles small. 25. S. pinnatifolia, p. 469 

AA. Corolla-tube not or little longer than calyx; anthers on slender filaments, exserted; fruit 

smooth or sometimes warty. 

B. Leaves ovate to ovate-lanceolate, rounded or rarely subcordate to broad-cuneate at 

base. 

C. Petiole M~/4 hi. long; leaves membranous, glabrous to pubescent beneath, veins 

elevated. 26. S. amurensis, p. 473 

CC. Petioles 3 / 5 -iV4 hi. long, slender, drooping; leaves thickish, glabrous, veins not or 

slightly elevated. 27. S. pekinensis, p. 491 

BB. Leaves oblong-lanceolate, attenuate at base, pubescent along midrib and veins, thin. 

28. S. Fauriei, p. 507 



ENUMERATION AND DESCRIPTION 

OF 

SPECIES AND VARIETIES 



Plate I 




SYRINGA EMOD1 
\rnold Arboretum no. 6628 s ) 
Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1025. 



Plate II 




SYRINGA EMODI 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6628) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. May 17, 1926. 



Plate III 




SYRINGA EMODI 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6628) 

Flower cluster. June 24, 1924. 



Plate IV 





(Arnold Arboretum no. 6628) 
Fruit, enlarged. Picked August, 1924. 



Plate V 




SYRINGA EMODI 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6628) 
Bark. November, 1925. 



SYRINGA EMODI 

Syringa emodi Wallich, Cat. no. 2831 (1831), name only. — G. Don, Gen. Syst. iv. 
51 (1838). — Loudon, Arb. Brit. 11. 1212, fig. 1041 (1838). — Royle, 111. Bot. Himal. 
1. 267; 11. t. 65, fig. 2 (1839). — Bosse, Handb. Blumengartn. 111. 462 (1842). — De Can- 
dolle, Prodr. vm. 283 (1844). — Lindley in Bot. Reg. xxxi. t. 6 (1845). — Hort. Univ. 
vi. 288 (1845). — Morren in Ann. Soc. Agric. Bot. Gand, 1. 107 (1845). — Rev. Hort. 
1845-1846, 27 (extract from Bot. Reg., 1. c.). — Paxton's Mag. Bot. xii. 22 (1846) (extract 
from Bot. Reg., 1. c). — Pepin in Rev. Hort. 1846, 123; 1856, 285. — Jacques and Herincq, 
Fl. Jard. Europ. in. 54 (1847-1857). — Bon Jard. 1849, 737- — Decaisne and Naudin, 
Man. Amateur Jard. in. 89 (1862-1866). — Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. 
Muscav. 492 (1864). — Jager, Ziergeholze, 529 (1865). — [K. Koch] in Wochenschr. Ver. 
Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. xii. 44 (1869) ; Dendr. 11. pt. 1. 270 (1872). — Brandis, Forest Fl. 
N. W. Centr. India, 306 (1874); Indian Trees, 445, 713 (1906). — Carriere in Rev. Hort. 
1876, 367, fig. 79. — DeVosinNederl.Fl.Pom.il. 201 (1876). — Sieboldia, 111. 18 (1877). — 
Hartwig and Riimpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 564, fig. (1875). — Hemsley, Handb. 
Hardy Trees, 296 (1877). — ' Gordon in Garden, xii. 419, fig. (1877). — Decaisne in Nouv. 
Arch. Mus. Paris, ser. 2, 11. 40 (1879), in part, excluding David specimen no. 2239. — 
Lauche, Deutsch. Dendr. 173 (1880). — Aitchison in Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xviii. 78 
(Flora Kuram Valley, etc., Afghan.) (1880). — C. B. Clarke in J. D. Hooker, Fl. Brit. 
India, in. 605 (1882). — Franchet in Bull. Soc. Philom. Paris, ser. 7, ix. 121-127 (1885); 
Observations sur les Syringa du nord de la Chine, reprint, 2 (1885). — Borbas in Erdesz. 
Lap. 1887, 251. — Flatt in Erdesz. Lap. 1887, 568; in Verh. Mitt. Siebenbiirg. Ver. 
Naturw. Hermannstadt, xl. 114 (1890); in Nagyvarad, March 29, 1891; A Josika- 
Farol, reprint, 16 pp. (1891). — Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. in. 536, fig. 562 (1887). — 
Boissier, Fl. Orient. Suppl. 342 (1888). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 46, June 20 
(1913); n. s. in. 41 (1917). — Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 115 (1889). — H. Christ 
in Verh. Mitt. Siebenbiirg. Ver. Naturw. Hermannstadt, xl. 116 (1890). — E. Lemoine in 
Garden, xxxix. 92, fig. (p. 106) (1891). — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 378, fig. (1892). — Mou- 
illefert, Traite Arb. Arbris. 11. 1000 (1892-1898). — Koehne, Deutsch. Dendr. 500 
(1893). — L. Henry in Jardin, vm. 88, 102 (1894); xv. 280 (1901); in Jour. Soc. Hort. 
France, ser. 4, 11. 728, 752 (1901), in part, excluding David specimens. — Gourlot in Jar- 
din, xi. 150 (1897). — Bean in Garden, liii. 276 (1898); Trees and Shrubs Brit. Isles, 11. 
566, fig. (1914). — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 207 (1899); in Bailey, 
Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3300 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 752 (1927). — Keissler 
in Oesterr. Bot. Zeit. xlix. 213 (1899). — Grosdemange in Rev. Hort. 1902, 178.— 
Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415 (1903). — Schneider in Wien. 
111. Gartenz. xxvin. 100 (1903); in Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. 82, p. 89 (1905); in Mitt. 
Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 226, 230 (1911); 111. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 783 (1911); in 
Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913). — Zabel in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. 

17 



18 THE LILAC 

Ges. no. 13, 66 (1904). — Dunbar in Gard. Mag. 1. 234 (1905). — Antal Guylas 
in Muzeum Fiizetek (Kolosvar), 11. 35-66 [Hungarian]; 67-104 [German], t. in. figs. 
3, s, t. rv. figs. 8, 9, 14, 17 (1907); A Syringa Josikaea Jacq. fil. es a Syringa Emodi Wal- 
lich; Syringa Josikaea Jacq. fil., und Syringa Emodi Wallich, reprint, 38 pp., t. in. 
figs. 3, 5, t. iv. figs. 8, 9, 14, 17 (1909). — Mottet, Arbust. Orn. 243, fig. 55 (1908); Arb. 
Arbust. Orn. 338 (1925). — Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxm. 155 (1916); Aristocrats of the 
Garden, 215, 225 (1917). — Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 172 (1916). — 
Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 75, fig. 3 a, b (1920). — Silva Tarouca 
and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 404 (1922). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey 
in Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923). — A. 0[sborn] in Garden, lxxxvii. 301 (1923). — Stipp 
in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xl. 398 (1925); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 
37, 148 (1926). — Stares, Cerines {Syringa L.), 4, 27 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 
11. (1926). — G. Hegi, HI. Fl. Mittel-Eur. v. pt. 111. 1910, 1912 (1927). 

Syringa indica Royle according to Lindley in Bot. Reg. xxxi. t. 6 (1845), as a synonym. 

Syringa vulgaris var. Emodi De Jaubert, Invent. Cult. Trianon, 25 (1876). 

S[yringa] Josikaea Franchet in Rev. Hort. 1 891, 332, in part, as to the synonym S. Emodi 

Wallich. 
Syringa villosa var. Emodi Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 207 (1899), as 

a synonym; in Bailey, Cycl. Amer. Hort. iv. 1762 (1902). 
S[yringa] Emodi fi[ore] albo Hort. according to Zabel in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. 

no. 13, 66 (1904), as a synonym. 

A broad shrub up to 15 ft. tall; branches and branchlets upright or ascending, robust, 
gray or olive-brown, with conspicuous, long, pale lenticels and prominent fissures in the 
bark, glabrous. Winter-buds ovoid with acute apex, flower bud 7 /ie in- long more or 
less, dark to reddish brown, scales acute, glabrous, lower pair prominently keeled. Leaf- 
scar much raised, semicircular, not conspicuous, medium size; bundle-trace semicircular. 
Leaves elliptic to oblong, 2-9 in. long, 1-5 in. broad, acute, base acute or tapering, 
dull dark green, glabrous above, pale, glaucous, glabrous or rarely pubescent on midrib 
beneath; midrib, primary veins and veinlets conspicuous, midrib tinged above Indian 
Purple (xxxvni.) for }/2 the length of leaf; petiole Y^A i n - !<> n g> slender, glabrous, 
rarely pubescent, tinged Indian Purple (xxxvin.). Inflorescence borne on leafy shoots, 
terminal, upright, 3-5 in. long, 1-3 in. broad; rhachis frequently quadrangular, 
glabrous, rarely pubescent, lenticellate ; pedicel short, glabrous, rarely pubescent; calyx 
short, glabrous, rarely pubescent, with shallow, rounded teeth; corolla-tube cylindric, 
slender, % in. long; corolla-lobes spreading at right angles to corolla- tube, narrow, 
cucullate; corolla 3 /io in. in, diameter; color in bud Pale Chalcedony Yellow (xvn.) 
tinged with Rhodonite Pink (xxxvin.); when expanded white; anthers Chalcedony 
Yellow (xvn.), inserted in mouth of corolla-tube, protruding half their length. Capsule 
oblong, smooth, glabrous, brown, % in. long, each valve terminating in a slender tip. 
(The notes on the color of the flowers were taken from a plant (no. 6628) growing in the 
Arnold Arboretum.) 

Habitat: Western Himalayas to Kumaon; Afghanistan. 

Syringa emodi is first mentioned in 183 1 by Nathaniel Wallich, without descrip- 
tion, in his voluminous catalogue, written in long-hand, and entitled "A numerical 



SYRINGA EMODI 19 

list of dried specimens of plants in the East India Company's botanic garden at 
Calcutta." Wallich notes: "Kamaon versus Himalayam. R.B." The plants 
given in the Numerical List, it is stated, were collected under the superintendence 
of Dr. Wallich. Under plant no. 4, Grammatis caudata Wallich, three specimens 
are cited, the second of which was gathered by Robert Blinkworth and a footnote 
identifies him as a plant-collector under Dr. Wallich. The "R.B." mentioned 
above is undoubtedly the same collector. Britten and Boulger (Biographical Index 
of British and Irish Botanists, 18, 1893) mentions a "Blinkworth, Richard 
(fl[ourished] 1830). Collected at Kumaon. Correspondent of Wallich. Blink- 
worthia Choisy." It seems probable that there was but one Blinkworth who collected 
for Wallich, but whether his Christian name was incorrectly cited by Wallich or 
by Britten and Boulger has been impossible to determine. Blinkworth was evidently 
the first to collect S. emodi. 

The number of the plant is given as 2831. Wallich's catalogue was issued from 
1828-1849, and in citing the year 1831 I have followed De Candolle's notes given 
in the Kew "Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information" (1913, 260) which states: 
"In Wallich's list, or catalogue, as it is usually cited, the following dates may be 
found: — Preface, December 1, 1828; after no. 2159, December, 1829; after no. 4361, 
1830. . . I was not clear as to the earlier numbers till I found in an unpublished 
dictionary by de Candolle the following valuable note: — Nos. 1-2 153, 1829; nos. 
2154-2603, 1830; nos. 2604-4877, 1831; nos. 6225-7683, 1832." 

The first description of the plant is found in G. Don's "General History . . ." 
in 1838, and reads: "leaves elliptic-oblong, glaucous beneath, attenuated at the 
base, and acuminated at the apex. . . . Branches warted. Thyrse terminal, 
panicled. Capsules almost cylindrical. Bud scales permanent at the base of the 
year's shoots. Flowers apparently purple;" Don notes it as a "Shrub 8 to 10 feet?." 
In the same year this description appears, slightly changed in form only, in Loudon's 
"Arboretum et Fruticetum Britannicum. . . ." Loudon mentions it among "Species 
of Syringa not yet introduced" and his figure is of little value. 

A colored plate appears in J. Forbes Royle's "Illustrations of the Botany and 
other branches of the Natural History of the Himalayan Mountains and of the 
Flora of Cashmere" published in 1839. A second was published in "The Botanical 
Register" of 1845 with a description by John Lindley. These two illustrations 
differ considerably, as is noted by Lindley: "It is not however quite certain that 
the plant intended by this eminent Botanist Dr. Royle is the same as that of Dr. 
Wallich's distributions, for the leaves have, in Dr. Royle's Indian figure, a very 
different form, tapering much to the foot-stalk, and the flowers are lilac, not white, 
in a long leafy panicle; moreover the segments of the corolla are without the 
singular inflexed point which is so striking a feature of the plant before us, and which 
we find equally in the dried specimens distributed by the East India Company. 
We however observe that a part of these specimens, not in flower, more resemble 
Dr. Royle's figure, and it may be that they are mere forms of each other." The 



20 THE LILAC 

flowers of Royle's plate are purplish while those of Lindley's are greenish white; 
moreover the lenticels on the bark, which Lindley calls "pale pustule-like callos- 
ities," and which are a conspicuous character of this species, are lacking from Royle's 
plant, while the inflorescence is more open and the leaves are narrower and more 
tapering. One important character of this species, the protruding anthers, is, 
however, present in the flowers of both illustrations. Later figures of 5. emodi 
more nearly resemble the Lilac figured in "The Botanical Register." The plant of 
S. emodi growing in the Arnold Arboretum produces flowers similar in general 
appearance and in color to those of the Lindley plate. 

Burvenich (Rev. Hort. Beige Etr. xxvin. 193, t. 1902) writes of S. emodi in 
some detail and gives a full page colored figure of the plant but although he mentions 
the Lilac as coming from the Himalayas he describes the flowers as "blanc came" 
and his illustration indicates that he is writing of 5. villosa Vahl. I have, with a 
question, referred his plant to the latter species. 

Royle tells us that "the Himalayan Lilac is found in Kemaon, and in Sirmore 
on £he Suen range and the banks of the Giree and Jumna rivers." Sir Dietrich 
Brandis (Forest Fl. N. W. Centr. India, 1. c.) reports its habitat as: "Safedkoh, 
trans-Indus, 9000 feet. Abundant in many parts of N. W. Himalaya, from the 
Indus to the Sarda, ascending to 11,000 feet, in the outer moister ranges as well as 
in the inner more arid tracts (Lahoul)"; he adds, "the leaves used as fodder for 
goats." Brandis here describes the flowers as "purplish lilac, scented." Later 
(Indian Trees, I.e.) he mentions them as "white or purplish," and, in an addenda 
(p. 713) states that the plant "ascends to 12,000 ft." Major J. E. T. Aitchison in 
his work "On the Flora of the Kuram valley, etc., Afghanistan" describes 5. emodi 
as a "common shrub from nearly 8000 to 9000 feet; never occurs as low down as 
S. persica so as to mix with it. The flowers are always pure or greenish white 
never purple." In writing of the "Vegetation of the Valleys of the Safed Koh" 
(p. n) he notes: "As the valley widens largish trees of the walnut in a wild state 
occur, and with it Euonymus fimbriatus, Rhamnus purpureus and R. dahuricus, 
Fothergilla, Staphylea emodi and Syringa emodi, with pure white flowers. It is 
curious to note that the last-named plant always occupies a higher position than 
its congener 5. persica, and that the two never seem to mingle." The S. persica 
to which Aitchison refers is now considered to be a distinct species, 5. afghanica 
Schneider. C. B. Clarke, in Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker's "Flora of British India," 
notes that 5. emodi occurs in "sub-alpine Himalaya, alt. 9-12,000 feet, from Kashmir 
to Kumaon, frequent;" he mentions the corolla as "purplish or white." 

L. Henry states in his monograph (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, n. 752, 1901) 
that this Lilac was found by Victor Jacquemont on his voyage to Kashmir and 
Nepal in 1829-1832. The specimen (no. 2239) found by the Pere Armand David in 
the environs of Peking which was determined as S. emodi by Decaisne in his mono- 
graph (Nouv. Arch. Mus. Paris, ser. 2, 11. 40, 1879) * s now believed to be S. villosa, 
of which species S. emodi was once thought to be a variety. L. Henry also 



SYRINGA EMODI 21 

wrongly classifies this species when he states that it was noted by David about 
1871. 

A flowering specimen of S. emodi in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum, 
collected on July 2, 19 17, by R. R. Stewart (Plants of Punjab, no. 2544) at Sach 
Pass, Chamba, at an altitude of 9000 feet and described as a large shrub, is note- 
worthy because of the pubescent character of the leaves and inflorescence; else- 
where, without exception, I have found these to be glabrous. Other spontaneous 
specimens are in the same herbarium; among them is one (no. 2899^) collected 
at Ashdari-Sol, upper Chenab, at 7000 ft., July 14, 1917, by R. R. Stewart; two 
others (no. 184) from Mawar basin, Jhelum Valley, at 6500 ft., (no. 1034) from 
Khurhama forests, Lolah, Jhelum, at 8000 ft.; both of these are from Kashmir 
and were collected in 1906 and 1908 by Keshavanand; another from the Langera 
Reserve, Bhandal Valley, Chamba State, 8800 ft., collected October 5, 1919, by 
R. N. Parker; still another from Chhao forest, Chamba, at «)ooo ft., collected 
August 26, 1899, by Harsuhk. All these specimens came from the western Himalaya 
Mountains; the border of Sikkim and Nepal forms the dividing line between 
the eastern and western sections. 

The specimens in the herbarium of Kew Gardens, classified by W. B. Hemsley 
(Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxvi. 83, 1889-1902) in the "Index Florae Sinensis" 
(vol. in. 83) as S. emodi, I refer as follows: the [Ernst] Faber plant [no. 203], collected 
at Mt. Omei in Szechuan, at 10,000 feet, to S. Komarowi Schneider; the Tatarinov 
and David specimens collected in Chihli, the former on the hills near Peking, the 
latter from Po hua shan, as well as the Mollendorf specimen from the Hsiao wu 
tai shan in Chihli, to S. villosa Vahl. For the 5. emodi of Diels see S. Komarowi. 

Through the courtesy of Dr. A. W. Hill, two of the specimens (no. 722) showing 
fruit and foliage, which were collected by Dr. J. E. T. Aitchison in December, 
1879, were forwarded from Kew for examination. In the Gray Herbarium, Cam- 
bridge, Massachusetts, are two specimens collected by Schlagintweit in the western 
Himalayas; one (gen. no. of cat. 4050), dated June 14, 1856, from the province of 
Lahol, on the "left shore of the Bhaga (later Tsinab) at Kardong" (this specimen 
came from the Hooker herbarium) ; the second (gen. no. of cat. 12,032) came from 
Kashmir, at "Gures across the Ulli Plain and two small Passes to Bandipur (north- 
west of Srinagar)." Also in the Gray Herbarium is a specimen, collected at an 
elevation of 10,000 feet by R. Strachey and J. E. Winterbottom, from Singjari, 
Kumaon. 

Syringa emodi is cited by Franchet in 1891 (Rev. Hort.,1. c.) as a synonym of 
S. Josikaea Jacquin fil. Franchet had earlier, in his "Observations sur les Syringa 
du nord de la Chine" published in 1885, stated, but without indicating to which 
species he gave precedence, that he considered the two to be identical. The Hun- 
garian botanists, Flatt and Guylas in particular (as is noted under S. Josikaea), 
disagreed with Franchet's determination. 

Professor Sargent (Garden and Forest, I. 222, 1888) notes that to S. villosa 



22 THE LILAC 

"should perhaps be referred, as Mr. Franchet hints ... 5. Josikaea and 5. Emodi ..." 
Mr. Rehder in 1899 called S. emodi S. villosa var. Emodi. 

De Jaubert called the Himalayan Lilac S. vulgaris var. Emodi. 

Barral (Rev. Hort. i860, 88, 255) quotes a controversy between Carriere and 
Baltet as to whether S. emodi was a Lilac at all; Baltet states that it is not a Troene, 
the French for Privet or Ligustrum; he suggests, "Ne serait-ce pas plutot un 
Chionanthe ?" Carriere points out that the fruit of the Chionanthus is a drupe and 
not a dry capsule, as in the Lilac. He adds: "Le Syringa Emodi est peut-etre de 
tous les vegetaux celui qui 'mime' le mieux le Quinquina" [ = Cinchona Linnaeus]. 
Lindley (Bot. Reg., 1. c.) had noted its resemblance to the Privet: "Its blossoms 
have much the look of Privet, and are wholly destitute of the sweet perfume of 
other Lilacs, instead of which they have a heavy unpleasant smell." 

W. J. Bean (Garden, 1. c.) states: "The credit of first raising and cultivating 
this Lilac in Britain belongs to the (then) Horticultural Society, to whose garden 
seeds collected in the Himalayas were sent by Dr. Royle, the Indian botanist." 
Pepin in 1846 (Rev. Hort., 1. c.) tells us that three years earlier [1843] it was sent 
from England to France. He names it as growing on the continent in the collections 
of Messrs. Pele and Chauviere. He also states (Rev. Hort. 1856, 285) that it first 
flowered at the [Jardin des Plantes] Museum of Natural History, Paris, in 1849, 
and abundantly in 1856. 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 25, 1883) mentions S. emodi as 
"Ziemlich hart, soil bei starker Kalte zuriickfrieren. Im Bot. G., junge aus Samen 
gezogene Straucher, welche noch nicht gebluht haben, aber bisher gut ausgehalten 
haben." He notes it as cultivated at Riga in the garden of Wagner and according 
to Hoff. [?] winter-killed, — "(Hoff.: erfriert)." 

It appears in French nursery catalogues as follows: as Syringa Emodi (nouveau 
Lilas de l'Himalaya) (Oudin, 1845-1846, 13); as Lilas de l'Himalaya {Emodi) 
(Oudin, 1846-1847, 11); as Syringa (lilas) emodi (de l'Himalaya) ou species 
de Sanghai (Oudin, 1846-1847, 17); as Lilas, Syringa, Emodi, de l'Hymalaya 
(Sen6clauze, 1846-1847, n); as Syringa Emundii (A. Leroy, 1851,48); as Syringa 
(lilac) emundi (L. Leroy, 1858-1859, 94); as S. Emodi Wall., Lilas d'Emodii (A. 
Leroy, 1865, 100). 

In nursery catalogues of the United States we find it: as Syringa emodi, Lilac 
emodi (William R. Prince, 1847, 36); as Syringa Emodi, Lilac Emods, A Nepal 
species (Ellwanger and Barry, no. 2, 9, 1855-1856); as Syringa Emodii, Nepal 
Lilac (William R. Prince, 1856-1857, 44). 

In Great Britain the plant is not entirely hardy. William Jackson Hooker 
(Gard. Chron. 1854, 287; Rev. Hort. 1854, 356) states that he has observed winter 
killing of its young shoots in the garden of the then Horticultural Society at 
Chiswick. In his "Aristocrats of the Garden," E. H. Wilson writes of S. emodi 
in the United States: "it is less hardy than any other species" and is one of the 
few Lilacs "which thrive better in Great Britain than in New England." 



SYRINGA EMODI 23 

Carriere (Rev. Hort., 1. c.) writes of the plant's fruiting ability in France: 
"Les fruits, qui rappellent ceux du S. Josikaea, sont dresses comme ceux de ce 
dernier, mais tou jours tres-peu nombreux dans nos cultures." In a footnote he 
writes that at Brest (Finistere) at the military hospital it fruits abundantly: "La, 
en effet, le Syringa Emodi fructifie en telle abondance, que notre collegue et ami, 
M. Blanchard, jardinier en chef de cet etablissement, coupe avec soin chaque annee, 
aussitot qu'elles sont passees, toutes les inflorescences qui, sans cela, se chargent 
de graines et bientot tombent sur le sol, ou elles germent promptement et donnent 
naissance a des plantes qui encombrent les allees." Fruit is not uncommon on the 
plant in the Arnold Arboretum. 

L. Henry (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, 1. c), writes of S. emodi and of its varieties 
with variegated foliage: "Les Lilas Emodi n'ont guere de valeur ornementale que 
par leur beau feuillage et leur bonne tenue; la floraison en est mediocre. lis sont 
tout a fait rustiques sous le climat de Paris et se plaisent surtout en sols sains et 
s'echauffant facilement. On les multiplie de semis; les varietes se greffent sur 
franc, ou sur Lilas de Bretschneider, ou encore sur Lilas commun." 

Grosdemange (Rev. Hort., 1. c.) discusses its method of flowering. Lindley 
(Bot. Reg., 1. c.) tells us "It is easily increased by seeds or by cutting off the smaller 
side-shoots when half-ripe." 

S. emodi (no. 6628 Am. Arb.) was received at the Arnold Arboretum in the 
form of cuttings, from the Harvard Botanic Garden, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 
m July, 1 88 1, and, following the botanical classification adopted at various times, 
Hs name was changed from S. emodi to 5. villosa var. emodi, to S. villosa, and finally 
back to iS. emodi. Its flower buds are apt to be injured by late frosts. The plant 
blooms sparingly and the fragrance of its rather inconspicuous, greenish white 
flower-clusters, is not especially pleasing. It is a broad, round- topped shrub, 
heavily foliaged, with large leaves which unfold late in the spring, and only fall 
in late autumn. Its blooming season comes after that of the Common Lilac 
and later even than that of such tardy species as S. villosa and S. Julianae 
or near the middle or end of June. It is an erratic bloomer, some clusters 
only opening after others have faded. The individual blossom shrivels with- 
out falling from the flower-cluster which is rarely therefore in a state of per- 
fection. A distinguishing character of the plant is its extremely lenticellate bark, 
marked, on the branchlets, with long, pale, vertical fissures, which on the older and 
grayer branches become dark and net-like in appearance. 

John Lindley notes that seed was received at the garden of the Horticultural 
Society of London from Dr. Royle under "the names of Syringa Emodi and Syringa 
indica." It is commonly called the Himalayan Lilac and this has been adopted 
as approved common name by "Standardized Plant Names." The name has been 
translated into the French Lilas de l'Himalaya, and into the German Himalaya- 
Flieder. Pepin (Rev. Hort. 1846, 1. c.) calls it the Lilas des monts Emodi, and 
L. Henry (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, 1. c.) Lilas Emodi. Kirchner and others call it 



v 24 THE LILAC 

Emodi-Flieder. William R. Prince, as noted among the catalogue references, calls 
it the Nepal Lilac. Brandis, in 1874 and in 1906, mentions numerous vernacular 
names used in India. 

Four plants named by Wallich bear the specific name emodi, a Staphylea, a 
Paeonia, a Podophyllum and a Syringa. Neither Royle (111. Bot. Himal., 1. c.) 
nor Hooker (Fl. Brit. India, 1. c.) refer to the origin of the name. Charles Flatt 
in 1891 (see bibliography of S. Josikaed) refers to "S. emodi ... a plant that 
grows on the Himalayas (Mons Emodus, Kardong)" and Dr. Gustav Hegi in 
1927 states in a footnote to S. emodi: "Benannt nach dem 'Mons Emodus' 
bei dem Dorfe Kordong in Ostindien." (I suppose that Kordong refers to Kardong 
in the province of Lahol where, as noted, the species had been collected by 
Schlangintweit.) Dr. J. G. Th. Graesse (Orbis latinus, 83, 1861) on the other hand 
notes: "Emodi montes, das Himalaya-gebirge in Indien." To ascertain which 
definition of the word was the correct one I wrote to Dr. George F. Moore of 
Harvard University and received on November 25, 1927, the following very inter- 
esting reply : "I suppose that emodi as a specific name is meant to be a Latin genitive 
singular, e.g. Syringa emodi, 'S. of the Himalaya,' though the more common 
usage of botanists would have been to invent an adjective (emodiana), like S. 
chinensis. 'H/KoSojf opos or (plural) 'H/zco5d 6p-q is the name used by Greek geog- 
raphers in the third century B.C. and later for the Himalaya; Roman writers give 
Emodi montes (or H emodi — Pliny; or Haemodes (singular) — Mela). Another name 
for the range in classical geography is "Ifxaov opos, Imaus (mons) which Pliny 
(vi. 64) says, in the language of the natives, means 'snowy.' Both names, Emodi 
montes and Imaus, are thought to be derived from native Indian names of the 
Himalaya range, in which the word 'snow,' or 'snowy,' is the significant element. 
Neither is used by the classical geographers for any peak or particular part of the 
range, though after the eastern extension of the mountain system north of Farther 
India came to be known, they sometimes applied the name Emodi to the eastern 
part of the system (Ptolemy), and Imaus to what we call the Himalaya. What 
Wallich meant by his emodi can, therefore, not be learned from the ancients . . . 
The passage in Diodorus which you quote does not give as definite an indication 
of the region as might be desired because it is complicated with the question where 
he (or his authorities) thought that the 'Sakai' lived — one of the most perplexing 
problems of ethnography. My own opinion is that he located the Sakai in the 
Pamir, but the statements on this point in the ancient geographers and historians 
are irreconcilably conflicting." 

Sir David Prain, in a most informative letter dealing at length with the origin 
of the names Emodus and Himalaya as well as with the geographical regions which, 
by various writers, they were believed to represent, summarizes that Emodus as 
used by Dr. Wallich in his Syringa emodi meant the Himalayan range generally. 

Mr. Arthur Osborn of Kew, writing in "The Garden" of 1923, tells us that 
"hybrids raised on the continent between this species [S. emodi] or S. villosa 



SYRINGA EM0D1 25 

and the Common Lilac are interesting and will no doubt be heard from in 
the future, but the Great War checked their development and dissemination." 
Mr. S. R. Duffy (Garden and Home Builder, May, 1927, 312) also writes: "Just 
before the outbreak of the world war we were told of a new race of late flowering 
Lilacs to be sent out. These were hybrids between the villosa section and the 
vulgaris hybrids and between the members of the villosa section." This cross is 
presumably the same as that to which Mr. Osborn had reference and is here dis- 
cussed under the hybrid S. Henryi Schneider (S. Josikaea X S. villosa). I know of 
no hybrid between Lilacs of the two groups Villosae and Vulgares. 

Three forms of S. emodi, characterized by variegated foliage, have been culti- 
vated. For convenience they are here arranged alphabetically. 
A form in which the leaves are said to be yellow throughout is : 

Aurea Hort. Behn[s]ch according to Carriere in Rev. Hort. 1886, 547, as S. Emodi 
aurea. — Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. Suppl. v. 696 (1900). — L. Henry in Jour. Soc. Hort. 
France, ser. 4, 11. 753 (1901). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415 
(1903). — Render in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3300 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and 
Shrubs, 752 (1927). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 78 (1920). — 
Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 28 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

S\yringa] E[modi] foliis aureis Mouillefert, Traite Arb. Arbris. n. iooi (1892-1898). 

Carriere writes of this form: "Cette variete, qui, par tous ses caracteres, rappelle le 
type, n'en differe guere que par la couleur de ses feuilles, qui est d'un jaune pale. Elle 
s'est aussi produit par dichroisme sur le Syringa Emodi foliis variegatis chez MM. Simon- 
Louis freres, a Plantieres-les-Metz." Carriere does not state why he attributes this 
form to Behnsch but he may have distributed the plant. 

Maxime Cornu (Rev. Hort. 1888, 493), writing of 5. emodi (not of S. Emodi rosea 
[= S. villosa] to which the article chiefly has reference), states: "II y a dans le S. 
Emodi cultive jusqu'ici une forme a. feuilles tres nettement dorees. Nous la possedons 
au Museum." 

L. Henry also writes: "Obtenu dans les pepinieres Simon-Louis, par dichroisme du 
S. Emodi foliis variegatis. Notablement different du type, non settlement par le beau 
coloris jaune de ses feuilles, argentees en dessous et nettement discolores, mais encore par 
les particularites suivantes; jeunes pousses et jeunes feuilles jaunatres au lieu d'etre 
rougeatres ou bronzes; floraison plus precoce d'une huitaines de jours; fleurs plus fines a, 
tube plus court et a divisions plus tot et plus nettement recurvees, devenant revolutees; 
calice vert et plus court; etamines tres nettement saillantes au lieu de n'arriver qu'a la 
gorge; inflorescences plus courtes et plus compactes, a verrues beaucoup plus nombreuses, 
plus saillantes, mais moins allongees; odeur encore plus forte et plus desagreable." 

Mouillefert describes the form thus: "Feuillage uniformement jaune et fleurs blanc- 
jaunatre." 

Rehder attributes this form to Simon-Louis. He had written (Moller's Deutsch. 
Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 207, 1899): "Die gelbblattrige Form S. Emodi aurea Sim [on] - 
Louis stammt moglicherweise von S. Emodi rosea [= S. villosa].'" At this time there 



26 THE LILAC 

was considerable confusion as to the relationship of S. emodi and 5. villosa and Rehder 
then considered S. villosa to be a synonym of S. Emodi rosea Cornu. 

I have found only one mention (Cornu in Rev. Hort. 1888, 493) of a variegated- 
leaved form of 5. villosa and the plant is given no botanical name. See S. villosa. 

A plant of the form Aurea is growing in the collection of the Department of Parks, 
Rochester, New York. The foliage is golden throughout, contrasting noticeably with 
the young shoots, crimson in color. 

Another, in which the foliage is merely variegated with yellow, is: 

Aureo-variegata Lavallee, Arb. Segrez. 169 (1877), name only, as S. Emodi var. aureo- 
variegata. — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 207 (1899) ; in Bailey, 
Stand. Cycl. Hort. VI. 3300 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 752 (1927). 

Syringe Emodi foliis variegatis Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 140 (1880). — Carriere in Rev. 
Hort. 1886, 547. — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 378 (1892). — Mouillefert, Traite Arb. 
Arbris. 11. 1001 (1892-1898). — L. Henry in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 11. 753 
(1901). — Stipp in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xl. 398 (1925). 

Syringa Emodi varieg[ata] van Kleef in Sieboldia, 111. 376 (1877). — Nicholson, 111. Diet. 
Gard. hi. 536 (1887). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415 
(1903). — Bean, Trees and Shrubs Brit. Isles, 11. 567 (1914). — Lingelsheim in 
Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 78 (1920). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 28 
(1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

Carriere, who attributes this form to Simon-Louis, writes: "Ne differe . . . du Sy- 
ringa Emodi que par la panachure de ses feuilles, qui est disseminee diversement dans 
l'interieur du limbe sous forme de marbrures jaunatres." 

Nicholson notes that "This differs from the type in having the leaves blotched with 
dull yellow." 

Maxime Cornu (Rev. Hort. 1888, 493) writing of S. emodi (not of S. Emodi rosea 
[= S. villosa] to which the article chiefly has reference) states: "il existe aussi une forme 
panachee doree d'apres M. Lavallee." 

L. Henry writes: " Se distingue du precedent [S. Emodi aurea] par les marbrures jaun- 
atres disseminees sur le limbe." 

Baudriller gives it the common name of Lilas de l'Himalaya a, feuilles panachees and 
notes: "Tres-belle variete nouvelle a, tres-grandes feuilles elegamment panachees et 
bordees de jaune"; Hartwig calls it the "bunt blatteriger E[modi] - Fl[ieder]." 

A third, characterized by yellow margins to the leaves is: 

Elegantissima Ottolander in Sieboldia, 11. 191 (1876). — De Vos in Sieboldia, 11. 198 
(1876). — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 77 (1885). — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 378 (1892).— 
Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415 (1903). — Lingelsheim in 
Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 78 (1920). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 28 (1926); 
reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

Ottolander describes this as "zeer fraai geel gerand, mede door de Vos gewonnen, 
waren takken tentoongesteld." De Vos notes that in the "Verslag der Bloemen-Tent- 
oonstelling onzer Pomologische Vereeniging" it is stated that this plant was raised by 



SYRINGA EMODI 27 

Mm but this is not the case. He says that it is possible that he first had the plant but it 
was originally raised by Th. van der Bom of Oudenbosch. 

The Zoschen catalogue notes: " gelbgerandete Blatter, schon aber zartlich," and 
Hartwig calls it the " zierlichster E[modi]-Fl[ieder], mit gelbgerandeten Blattern." 

Possibly identical with this are: Lilas Emodi foliis aureis marg[inatis] (Baron- 
Veillard, Cat. 1876-1877, n) described as "Plante encore peu repandue, mais qui merite 
de l'etre car son feuillage et sa belle panachure en feront au printemps sans nul doute le 
plus beau des arbustes a feuilles caduques"; 5. Emodi variegata (Transon, Cat. 1880- 
188 1, 66), described as follows: "Leaves as large as those of a Chionanthus in spring, 
freely edged with gold; the color is not so striking in autumn"; and S. Emodi aurea 
marginatis (Van Geert, Cat. no. 169, 44, 1896), listed without description. 



Plate VI 




SYRINGA YUNNANENSIS 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 7202) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate VII 




SYRINGA YUNNANENSIS 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,387) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. May 3, 1926. 



Plate VIII 




all 

W 6 « 

§ 3 £ 

2 <u 

. -" *-• 

s < ,3 

tf 2 a? 

S E £ 



Plate IX 







SYRINGA YUNNANENSIS 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 7202) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked August, 1924. 



Plate X 




SYRINGA YUNNANENSIS 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 7202) 

Bark. November, 1925. 



SYRINGA YUNNANENSIS 

Syringa yunnanensis Franchet in Rev. Hort. 1891, 308, 332; in Garden, xl. 157, 202 
(1891). — L. Henry in Jardin, ix. 76 (1895); in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, n. 755 
(1901). — Bretschneider, Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 905 (1898). — Schneider in 
Wien. 111. Gartenz. xxvni. 100 (1903); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 227 (191 1); 
111. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 780, figs. 488 p-r, 489 g (1911). — M. Smith in Hemsley in 
Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxxvi. 524 (Ind. Fl. Sin. 111.) (1903-1905). — Diels in Notes 
Bot. Gard. Edinburgh, vn. no. xxxiv. 257 (Plant. Chin. Forrest.) (191 2). — Sargent in 
Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. 11. 30 (1916); m. 43 (1917); v. 27 (1919); vin. 23 (1922). — 
Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 173 (1916). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. 
Cycl. Hort. vi. 3302 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 752 (1927). — Lingelsheim in 
Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 95 (1920). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. 
Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 405 (1922). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 
485 (1923). — Stares, Cerines {Syringa L.), 4, 23 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, n. 
(1926). 

A narrow shrub up to 12 ft. tall, considerably taller than broad; branches upright, 
slender, gray-brown, lenticellate ; branchlets glabrous, rarely puberulent, lenticellate, 
sometimes quadrangular. Winter-buds oblong with acuminate apex, flower bud 9 /i 6 
in. long more or less, lower scales dark brown, upper reddish to yellowish brown with 
dark brown margins, acuminate, glabrous, all scales keeled and forming a markedly four- 
sided bud. Leaf-scar slightly raised, shield-shaped, medium size; bundle-trace semicircu- 
lar. Leaves elliptic-oblong to elliptic-lanceolate, occasionally oblanceolate, 1H-3 in. 
long, 3^-1 in. broad, acute or acuminate, base cuneate, ciliolate, glabrous above, glaucous 
beneath; midrib on lower and upper surfaces colored Hay's Maroon (xiii.); petiole J^ 
in. long, glabrous, color Hay's Maroon (xiii.). Inflorescence borne on leafy shoots, 
terminal, upright, 6-7 in. long, 4 in. broad; rhachis puberulent, color Hay's Maroon 
(xiii.) to Burnt Umber (xxvni.), lenticellate; pedicel short, puberulent, tinged like 
rhachis; calyx glabrous, with short, rounded teeth or truncate, tinged like rhachis; corolla- 
tube slender, funnelform, 5 /ie in. long; corolla-lobes spreading at right angles to corolla- 
tube, pointed, cucullate; corolla % in. in diameter; color in bud Light Russet- Vinaceous 
to Pale Purplish Vinaceous (xxxix.); when expanded tube Pale Purplish Vinaceous 
without, lobes white marked with Pale Purplish Vinaceous (xxxix.) at throat within; 
anthers large, Barium Yellow (xvi.), inserted just below the mouth of corolla-tube, 
occasionally protruding. Capsule oblong, smooth, dark brown, % in. long, each valve 
terminating in a slender tip. (The notes on the color of the flowers were taken from a 
plant (no. 17,387) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 

Habitat: China: provinces of Yunnan; Szechuan. 

Syringa yunnanensis was described in 1891 by Adrien Franchet from two 
specimens in the herbarium of the Museum of Natural History, Paris, collected 

29 



30 THE LILAC 

in Yunnan, China, by the Abbe Jean Marie Delavay who had been sent to that 
country by the Missions Etrangeres of which society he was a member. The 
flowering specimen (no. 2619) dated June 17, 1887, was growing in the woods 
near Yen tze hay (Lan kong) at an altitude of 3000 meters; Delavay notes that 
it was a shrub "de 3 metres, a rameaux affiles." The fruiting specimen, which 
bears no number, was collected on September 5, 1887, in the woods of Fang yang 
tchang above Mo so yn also at an altitude of 3000 meters. Bretschneider, for 
whom Delavay verified the localities at which his collections were made, states 
that Lan kong is a lake near Tali, — the city of Tali fu; and of Fang yang tchang 
he writes: "Ce sont de vastes et riches paturages dans les monts Hee chan men, 
ou paissent en ete de grands troupeaux de moutons." Of Delavay's collections he 
writes: "D[elavay] gathered plants on the whole journey through Hu peh, Sze 
ch'uan and Yun nan, but the chief field of his explorations lay among the elevated 
mountains, west, north and north-east of the great lake near Talifu where he 
botanized for nearly ten years in different seasons." In a foot-note Bretschneider 
adds: "This part of Yun nan had been previously traversed by several European 
travellers, Gamier in 1868, Gill in 1877, Szeczenyi in 1880, Hosie in 1883, but no 
collections had been made there. Yun nan plants were for the first time gathered 
in 1868 by Dr. J. Anderson in the south-western part of the province." A. Franchet 
tells us that the plant was collected by Delavay in 1886; I have seen no specimen 
bearing that date. 

Franchet's description reads: "Cette nouvelle espece de la Chine occidental 
n'est pas bien eloignee du S. Josikaea; elle parait s'en distinguer suffisamment par 
la forme de ses feuilles, tres longuement attenuees a la base terminees assez brus- 
quement en pointe tres-developpee, et surtout par les nombreuses vermes qui 
recouvrent les rameaux et les capsules; la consistance des feuilles et la teinte 
blanchatre qu'elles presentent en dessous rappellent plutot le -S. Josikaea de 
Transylvanie que le S. Emodi; elles sont aussi finement ciliees sur les bords et 
presentent parfois, quand elles sont jeunes, quelques poils papilleux, en dessous 
sur les cotes. Le S. yunnanensis est un arbrisseau de 3 metres, assez grele, mais 
extremement florifere; ses grosses grappes ovales, dont les pedicelles et les rameaux 
sont finement poilus, sont formees de nombreuses fleurs rosees, a tube assez grele, 
et sont tres-odorantes ..." 

In 1906 and later years this species was collected by George Forrest in 
western Yunnan. His specimen (no. 4655) now in the herbarium of the Royal 
Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, was gathered in "June-August 1906"; he describes 
it as a "Shrub of 2 to 5 ft. Flowers pale purplish-rose," growing in "Shady open 
situations on the margins of pine forests on the eastern flank of the Tali Range. 
Lat. 25°4o' N. Alt. 9000-11,000 ft." The Forrest specimens (nos. 2294, 2636), 
both collected in 1906 in northwestern Yunnan and referred by Diels (Notes Bot. 
Gard. Edinb. vn. no. xxxn. 116, 149, 1912) to S. yunnanensis, are said by Lingels- 
heim to be epapillose on the under surface of the leaf and are by him considered 



SYRINGA YUNNANENSIS 31 

to be closely related to S. alborosea N. E. Brown [ = S. tomentella Bureau and 
Franchet]. I have not seen these last two specimens. In a note under the specimen 
no. 2294 Diels notes that it is a somewhat variable plant, the leaves toward the 
base less narrow, the inflorescence larger, looser, the corolla 0.8-1.2 cm. long 
(in the type 0.6-0.8 cm. long). C. K. Schneider also collected numerous speci- 
mens in Yunnan in 191 4 and from his seed (no. 638), received in 191 5, was raised 
one of the plants (no. 17,387 Am. Arb.) now growing in the Arnold Arboretum. 

In the Arnold Arboretum herbarium are specimens collected in Yunnan by 
George Forrest (nos. 4655, 13,801, 19,584, 20,924, 22,364), by J. F. Rock (nos. 5099, 
9009, 3726, 3770, 3783, 3407, 8594), by C. K. Schneider (nos. 2771, 2133, 2279, 
3298), and in Szechuan by C. K. Schneider (nos. 1292, 3537, 1164, 1463, 3500). 

To George Forrest is due the introduction of this Lilac. 

Of the early distribution of 5. yunnanensis Professor W. W. Smith kindly sent 
me on December 16, 1926, the following information: "The earliest reference to 
our having S. yunnanensis appears in our catalogue of Plantae Chinenses Forrest- 
ianae (Notes from the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, vol. vii. 191 2, nos. 
F. 2294, F. 2636, F. 4655). George Forrest at this time was collecting for A. K. 
Bulley, who was the first director of the Bees Nursery Company. This company 
and the Botanic Garden here raised plants from seeds collected by Mr. Forrest in 
these early expeditions. The plants apparently did very well and seed of S. yunnan- 
ensis appeared in our Seed List for December, 1920, ["List of Seeds collected in the 
Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, during the year 1920" in Notes Bot. Gard. 
Edinburgh, December, 1920, p. cxxvn.] showing that the plants had made con- 
siderable progress by that date. The name has appeared every year since that date 
in our annual Seed List. There is little doubt that we would distribute a few 
young plants previous to the appearance of the name in 1920 in the Seed List, 
but I am afraid that I can scarcely quote you exact records for that. Messrs. Bees 
Ltd. would very likely distribute about the same time but of that I can give you 
no certain information. You may take it, however, that we did not distribute 
seed when the first Forrestian collections were received but that we sowed what 
we got through the courtesy of Mr. A. K. Bulley." 

The Bees Nursery Company of Neston, Cheshire, England, sent the Arnold Ar- 
boretum its first plant of 5. yunnanensis (no. 7202 Arn. Arb.) in September, 1908, 
under the name Ligustrum no. 21. It flowered for the first time in 1913 but Professor 
Sargent writes that only in 1916 did it flower freely and show its true character. 
In a list of Chinese and Korean species of Syringa introduced to the Arnold Arbore- 
tum after 1902 the date of the receipt of S. yunnanensis is given as 191 5 (Bull. 
Arn. Arb. vni. 23, 1922). In 1915 seed, collected by C. K. Schneider in Yunnan, 
was received at the Arnold Arboretum, and, in error, was probably cited by 
Professor Sargent as the first introduction. 

This shrub is now about twelve feet tall and of slender habit, as of a plant that 
has been overcrowded when young, and it shows little tendency to produce 



32 THE LILAC 

suckers. It is an interesting Lilac, but blooms sparingly and because of its habit 
of growth may be used to best advantage at the back of a shrubbery planting. Its 
leaves, distinguished by their glaucous under surface, expand late in the spring 
and fall early in the autumn; the flower-clusters, which appear considerably later 
than those of the Common Lilac and its forms, are open and broad at the base, 
resembling somewhat those of S. Sweginzowii although the clusters are less numerous 
and less showy. The individual blossom, with wide throat, has not infrequently 
five corolla-lobes. 

In 1 901, L. Henry (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, 1. c.) mentions S. yunnanensis among 
"Lilas non introduits encore dans les cultures." Miss M. Smith in the third part 
of Hemsley's "Index Florae Sinensis" included it, as a name only, in the "List of 
Genera and Species discovered in China since the publication of the various parts 
of the 'Enumeration' from 1886 to March 1904 ..." 

5. yunnanensis is closely related to the Himalayan Lilac, 5. emodi and may 
be regarded as its Chinese representative. As living plants, however, the two 
appear quite distinct. 

Yunnan Lilac has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized 
Plant Names." 

There are in cultivation in this country plants bearing the name S. pinetorum 
W. W. Smith, which were propagated in the Arnold Arboretum from material 
received from the Botanic Garden, Edinburgh. These plants should be identified 
with S. yunnanensis and belong, not to the group of the Vulgares, as does S. 
pinetorum, but to that of the Villosae. 



Plate XI 





»■> 



I 






SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 18,064) 

Winter buds, enlarged. January, 1926. 



Plate XII 





SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 18,064) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. May 3, 1926. 



Plate XIII 




SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 18,064) 

Flower cluster. June 20, 1924. 



Plate XIV 




SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 18,064) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked August,' 1924. 



Plate XV 




SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 

Syringa Josikaea Jacquin fil. according to H. G. L. Reichenbach, Iconogr. Bot. PI. 
Crit. viii. 32, no. 1049, t. dcclxxx. (1830); Fl. Germ. Excurs. 1. 432, no. 2067 (1831); 
Icones Fl. Germ. Helvet. xvn. 20, t. mlxxiii. fig. 11. 6-8 (1855). — Jacquin fil. in Flora, 
xiv. pt. 1. 67 (1831); in Isis, col. 870 (1831); in Allg. Gartenzeit. 1. 4 (1833); in Haveti- 
dende, in. 513 (1837) (Danish translation); Eclogae PL 11. 11, t. 167 (1844). — Flora, 
xrv. pt. 1. 399 (1831). — R. Graham in Jameson, Edinb. New Philos. Jour. xv. 385, 
Sept. 10 (1833). — Hooker in Bot. Mag. lx. t. 3278 (1833). — Loudon in Gardener's Mag. 
ix. 706 (1833); Arb. Brit. 11. 12 10, figs. 1037, 1038 (1838). — Neumann in Ann. Fl. Pom. 
n. 306 (1834). — Ann. Soc. Hort. Paris, xiv. 355 (1834). — Hort. Reg. in. 38 (1834). — 
Lindley in Bot. Reg. xx. t. 1733 (1835). — Bluff and Fingerhuth, Compend. Fl. Germ. 1. 15 
(1836). — Bon Jard. 1836, 597; 1849, 73^- — Van Houtte in L'Horticulteur Beige, in. 
251 (1836), as S. Josikeii. — Maund, Botanist, 1. 24 [1836?]; Floral Reg. 1. 62 (1851). — 
G. Don, Gen. Syst. iv. 51 (1838). — Sweet, Hort. Brit. ed. 3, 454 (1839). — Spach, 
Hist. Nat. Veg. vm. 281 (1839). — Dietrich, Sp. PL 1. 38 (1839). — Bosse, Vollstand. 
Handb. Blumengartn. 111. 460 (1842).- — De Candolle, Prodr. vm. 283 (1844). — Pepin 
in Rev. Hort. 1844-1845, 120; 1846, 123. — Fuss in Baumgarten, Enum. Stirp. Transsilv., 
Mantissa, 1. 2 (1846); FL Transsilv. Excurs. 432 (1866). — Jacques and Herincq, Man. 
Gen. PL in. 54 (1847-1857). — Janka in Oesterr. Bot. Wochenbl. iv. no. 23, 188 (1854); 
in Termeszet. Fiizet. 1884, 313; in Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. xxxv. 313 (1885). — Decaisne 
and Naudin, Man. Amateur Jard. 111. 89 (1862-1866). — Kirchner in Petzold and Kirch- 
ner, Arb. Muscav. 492 (1864). — Jager, Ziergeholze, 529 (1865). — Lindley and Moore, 
Treasury Bot. n. 1117 (1866). — Schur, Enum. PL Transsilv. 451 (1886). — May in 
Rev. Hort. 1870, 438. — Regel, Russ. Dendr. 208 [misnumbered 207] (1870). — [K. 
Koch] in Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. xn. 44 (1869); Dendr. n. pt. 1. 270 
(1872). — Hartwig and Riimpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 563, fig. (1875). — Willkomm, 
Forstl. Fl. Deutschl. 566 (1875). — De Jaubert, Invent. Cult. Trianon, 25 (1876).— 
Lavallee, Arb. Segrez. 169 (1877). — Hemsley, Handb. Hardy Trees, 296 (1877). — De 
Vos in Nederl. Fl. Pom. 201 (1878). — Decaisne in Nouv. Arch. Mus. Paris, ser. 2, 11. 41 
(1879). — Lauche, Deutsche Dendr. 171, fig. 58 (1880). — Simonkai (formerly Simkovics) 
in Termeszet. Fiizet. 1881, 43; Enum. Fl. Transsilv. 392 (1886). — J. Klein in Ter- 
meszet. Kozlony, xni. 314 (1881); in Bot. Centralbl. vn. 124 (1881) (German transl.). — 
Dietz in Erdesz. Lap. 1882, 221. — Borbas in Erdesz. Lap. 1882, 880; 1885, 396; 
1887, 251; in Termeszet. Fiizet. 1884, 75, 313; in Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. xxxv. 105 (1885); 
in Kertesz. Lap. 1887, 324. — Franchet in Bull. Soc. Philom. Paris, ser. 7, ix. 121-127 
(1885) ; Observations sur les Syringa du nord de la Chine, reprint, 2 (1885) ; in Rev. Hort. 
1891, 308, 332, excluding synonym S. emodi Wallich. — Bielz in Verh. Mitt. Siebenbiirg. 
Ver. Naturw. Hermannstadt, xxxvi. 51 (1886). — Csato in Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. xxxvi- 
249 (1886). — Kanitz in Magy. Nov. Lap. xi. 23 (1887). — Flatt in Erdesz. Lap. 1886, 
141; 1887, 568; in Kertesz. Lap. 1882, 24; in Verh. Mitt. Siebenbiirg. Ver. Naturw. 
Hermannstadt, XL. 113 (1890); in Nagyvarad, March 29, 1891; A Josika-Farol, reprint, 
16 pp. (1891). — Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. in. 536 (1887). — A. Michalus in Erdesz. 

33 



34 THE LILAC 

Lap. 1887, 982 ; 1898, 849. — Sargent in Garden and Forest, 1. 222 (1888) ; iv. 343 (1891) ; 
in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 7, June 14 (191 1); n. s. in. 41 (191 7). — Dippel, Handb. Laub- 
holzk. 1. 115 (1889). — C. F. Nyman, Conspect. Fl. Europ. Suppl. 11. 215 (1889-1890). — 
J. G. J[ack] in Garden and Forest, in. 322 (1890). — Christ in Verh. Mitt. Sieben- 
biirg. Ver. Naturw. Hermannstadt, XL. 116 (1890); in Garden and Forest, rv. 190 (1891); 
in Gard. Chron. ser. 3, x. 8 (1891). — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 378, fig. (1892). — Mouille- 
fert, Traite Arb. Arbris. n. 1001 (1892-1898). — Koehne, Deutsch. Dendr. 499 (1893). — 
L. Henry in Jardin, vm. 88, 102 (1894); ix. 31 (1895); xv - 2 &° C 1 *? 01 ); m Jour. Soc. 
Hort. France, ser. 3, xix. 444 (1897); ser. 4, n. 728, 750, 753 (1901); in Rev. Hort. 1902, 
40, t. fig. 2. — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 654, fig. (1896). — Dauthenay in Rev. 
Hort. 1898, 58. — Bean in Garden, liii. 276 (1898); Trees and Shrubs Brit. Isles, 11. 568 
(1914). — Pax in Engler and Drude, Veg. Erde, 11. 117, 194, 203, 206 (1898); x. 34, fig. 2, 
211, 256 (1908). — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xrv. 207 (1899); in 
Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3300 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 752 (1927). — 
Kardos in Kertesz. Lap. xv. 143 (1900). — Bois in Bull. Mus. Hist. Nat. Paris, vn. 233 
(1901). — St. Olbrich in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xvi. 561, fig. 11. (1901). — 
Grosdemange in Rev. Hort. 1902, 178. — Schneider in Wien. HI. Gartenz. xxviii. 100 
(1903); Dendr. Winterstudien, 221, fig. 211 o-s (p. 209), 266 (1903); in Gartenwelt, xi. 
463 (1907); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 230 (1911); 111. Handb. Laubholzk. 
11. 782 (1911); in Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913). — Beissner, Schelle 
and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415 (1903). — Dunbar in Gard. Mag. 1. 234 (1905). — 
Mottet, Arbust. Orn. 245 (1908); Arb. Arbust. Orn. 339 (1925). — L. Thaisz in Magy. 
Bot. Lap. vm. 217 (1909); x. 56 (1911); xi. 236 (1912). — Guylas in Muzeum Fuzetek 
(Kolosvar), n. 35-66 [Hungarian]; 67-104 [German], t. 11. 111. figs. 1, 2, 4, 6, t. rv. figs. 
7, 10-13, 15, 16, 18 (1907); A Syringa Josikaea Jacq. fil. es a Syringa Emodi Wallich; 
Syringa Josikaea Jacq. fil., und Syringa Emodi Wallich, reprint, pp. 1-38, t. 11. 111. 
figs. 1, 2, 4, 6, t. iv. figs. 7, 10-13, 15, 16, 18 (1909). — T. Blattny in Bot. Kozlem. ix. 163 
(1910); xii. 12 (1913). — L. Fekete and T. Blattny, Verbreit. Baume Straucher Ungarn. 
(transl. from the Hungarian, 1913), 1. 42, 43. 15*1 28 5> 379, 57 1 , 62 °> 82 S, 834, 835, map v. 
(1914). — Von Hayek, Pflanzend. Oesterr.-Ungarns, 1. 350, 413, 456, 467, t. xliv. (opp. 
p. 412) (1914-1915). — Kuphaldt in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 24, 231 (1915). — 
Schelle in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 24, 208 (1915). — Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 133 (1916). — -Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxiii. 153, 154 (1916); Aristo- 
crats of the Garden, 214, 224 (1917). — Kronfeld in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 27, 
215 (1918). — Peterfi in Magy. Bot. Lap. xxvu. 97 (1918). — Lingelsheim in Engler, 
Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 78, figs. 1 (e, f) 2, 3 (c) (1920). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, 
Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 404 (1922). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 
485 (1923). — Wierdak in Act. Soc. Bot. Poloniae, 1. 86 (1923). — Stipp in Gartenwelt, 
xxviii. 413, fig. 4 (1924); in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. XL. 398, fig. iv. (1925); in 
Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 37, 146, fig. (1926). — Stares, Cerines {Syringa L.), 4, 
26, fig. 6 (1926); reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). — G. Hegi, 111. Fl. Mittel-Eur. 
v. pt. in. 1909, 1912, figs. 2897 a, d, e, 2898 (1927).* 

* Other references to Syringa Josikaea which I have not seen are: A. Neilreich, "Aufzahlung der in 
Ungarn u. Slavonien beobachteten wildwachsenden Gefasspflanzen " (i. 445, 1866). — Simonkai in his Nagy- 
varadnak es videkenek novenyvilaga (pp. 72—77, 1 plate, 1890). 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 35 

Syringa Jacquinii Graham in Jameson, Edinb. New Philos. Jour. xv. 385, September 10 
(1833), as a synonym. 

Syringa vincetoxifolia Baumgarten in manuscript according to Steudel, Nomencl. Bot. 
ed. 2, pt. i-n. 656 (1841), as a synonym. — May in Rev. Hort. 1870, 438. — Borbas 
in Erdesz. Lap. 1882, 880; 1885, 396; in Termesz. Fuzet. 1884, 313. — Flatt in Verh. 
Mitt. Siebenburg. Ver. Naturw. Hermannstadt, xl. 120 (1890). — Christ in Garden 
and Forest, rv. 190 (1891); in Gard. Chron. ser. 3, x. 8 (1891). 

Syringa prunifolia Kitaibel in manuscript according to Borbas in Termesz. Fuzet. 1884, 
75, 117; in Erdesz. Lap. 1885, 396. — Flatt in Verh. Mitt. Siebenburg. Ver. Naturw. 
Hermannstadt, xl. 120 (1890). — Christ in Garden and Forest, iv. 190 (1891); in 
Gard. Chron. ser. 3, x. 8 (1891). 

Syringa Wolfi Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. 1. 28 (191 5); in. 42 (191 7); rv. 26 (1918); 
vi. 34 (1920); vni. 23 (1922). — Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxm. 155, fig. (1916); Aristo- 
crats of the Garden, 224 (1917). — Not Schneider. 

A shrub to 12 ft. tall; branches upright, stout, greenish gray, lenticellate; branchlets 
pubescent when young, sparingly lenticellate. Winter-buds ovoid with acute apex, 
flower bud % in. long more or less, lower scales dark brown, upper reddish brown with 
yellowish margins, acute, puberulous, keeled and forming a four-sided bud. Leaf-scar 
slightly raised, shield-shaped, not conspicuous, small; bundle-trace almost straight. 
Leaves broad-elliptic to elliptic-oblong, sometimes obovate, 2-5^ in. long, 1-2% in. 
broad, acute to acuminate, base cuneate or rounded, ciliolate, dark green, lustrous, 
glabrous above, glaucescent, sometimes pubescent especially along the veins, or glabrous 
beneath; petiole stout or slender, Yz~ h A in. long, glabrous or pubescent. Inflorescence 
borne on leafy shoot, terminal, upright, broadly pyramidal, interrupted, 4-9 in. long; 
rhachis, pedicel and calyx tinged Carob Brown (xrv.); rhachis pubescent; pedicel short, 
pubescent; calyx pubescent with short acute teeth; flowers sometimes fascicled, corolla- 
tube funnelform, %-% m - l° n g; corolla-lobes erect or slightly spreading, broad at 
base, acute, cucullate; corolla x li- 5 li6 in. in diameter; color in bud Dull Dusky Purple 
to Dull Dark Purple (xxvi.) to Bishop's Purple to Argyle Purple (xxxvii.) ; when ex- 
panded Argyle Purple to Purplish Lilac (xxxvii.) without, Light Pinkish Lilac or Hay's 
Lilac (xxxvii.) within, a solid color; anthers Vie in. long, Primrose Yellow (xxx.), 
inserted just above middle of corolla-tube. Capsule oblong, smooth, x /i in. long, acute, or 
rounded at apex, each valve terminating in a short tip. 

Habitat: Czechoslovakia; Rumania; Jugo-Slavia; Poland. 

This Lilac, later known as Syringa Josikaea, was earlier named Syringa pruni- 
folia by the botanist Paul Kitaibel. Kitaibel's name was not published and appears 
merely in a manuscript in the Hungarian National Museum, Budapest. Dr. 
Vincenz von Borbas, describing (Termeszet. Fuzet. 1884, 74; Erdesz. Lap. 1885, 396) 
two manuscripts of Sadler's, notes that in one, "Octav. Lat. 80," he found the 
following: u Syringa prunifolia Kit.: Ita interea pro conservanda memoria nomino, 
quae ad viam Munkacsino Leopolim ducentem inter Felso-Hrabonitza et Pudpolocz 
in cottu Beregh crescit, foliisque Pruni distincta, referente Dre. Bulla" which, 
translated, reads: "I call by this name temporarily, for the sake of memory, that 



36 THE LILAC 

Lilac which grows along the road from Munkacs to Lemberg, in the county of 
Bereg, between Felso-Hrabonitza and Pudpolocz and, according to Dr. Bulla, is 
distinguished by leaves similar to those of the Prunus." The date of this note is 
not given; Kitaibel lived from 1757 to 1817. But Charles Flatt (Erdesz. Lap, 
1887, 568) notes that twenty years after the lines just quoted were written the 
Baroness Josika found the plant on her estate. This would bring the date of 
Kitaibel's manuscript not later than 18 10. 

Borbas (Termeszet. Fuzet. 1884, 74) continues:* "He [Kitaibel] speaks here 
of a Lilac with leaves similar to those of the Prunus. A Lilac with such leaves, 
among our Syringa, cannot be anything else but Syringa Josikaea Jacq. De Candolle 
in his Prodromus, vol. vni. p. 283, says the following of 5. Josikaea: 'Folia . . . 
subtus albida, fere Populi halsamiferae^ but if we search among the Pruni, we 
find there also P. Padus, the leaves of which are on the under surface, especially 
on the springs [= veins?], finely pruinose, and thus similar to those of S. Josikaea. 
Other Lilacs of ours must here be out of the question, for the form of their leaves 
is different from that of the leaves of the Pruni. In the herbarium of Kitaibel 
I have not found any data about Syringa prunifolia. That this Syringa might 
be identical with S. Josikaea gains credit from the fact that it was found in the 
district of Ung. . . . Kitaibel . . . knew 5. Josikaea . . . before Jacquin, and 
he, alone among his contemporaries, knew it from the Sylvan Carpathians ..." 
Elsewhere (Erdesz. Lap. 1885, 396) Borbas writes again: "In Kitaibel's herbarium 
I have found no data about Syringa prunifolia. Possibly he jotted down the 
above sentence after the sole information of Bulla. But that 5. prunifolia might 
be identical with S. Josikaea, is evident from the fact that in 1881 it was found in 
the district of Ung." Julius Klein (Termeszet. Kozl. 1881, 314; Bot. Centr. v. 
no. 30, 125, 1 881) states that he received a number of dried specimens of 5. Josikaea 
from Mr. Tomcsanyi, assistant forester in East Kemencze, in the district of Ung. 
Lajos Thaisz (Magy. Bot. Lap. 1909, 217) confirms the fact that the plant grows in 
this section and adds: "Flatt, Borbas, and later Magocsi-Dietz, all note about 
S. Josikaea being found in the county of Bereg; they rely on Kitaibel's manuscript 
now preserved in the Hungarian National Museum. Kitaibel himself, however, 
had never seen the plant; he merely heard from his colleague, Dr. Bulla, that there 
was a species of Lilac between Felso-Hrabonitza and Pudpolocz; he only added 
the description 'foliisque Pruni distincta.' Kitaibel gave the name to save the 
plant from oblivion : ' Syringa prunifolia Kit. Ita interea pro conservanda memoria 
nomino.' Till now it was merely a suspicion and not a certainty that S. Josikaea 
grows in the county of Bereg; but last summer I collected at Szarvashaza numer- 
ous live specimens which, for the sake of greater authenticity, I distributed among 
my botanist colleagues. The place of growth at Szarvashaza is noteworthy also 
for the reason that it lies only at a distance of 5 km. from the place of growth given 

* Quotations from the Hungarian botanists are given in translation for which I am indebted to Mr. Zoltan 
Haraszti of the Boston Public Library. 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 37 

by Bulla and Kitaibel, and thus makes it certain that S. prunifolia Kit. is really- 
identical with S. Josikaea." 

Another earlier name for this species is cited as a synonym by Steudel in his 
"Nomenclator Botanicus":' "S. vincetoxifolia Baumg[arten], mpt." No mention 
of S. Josikaea appears in Baumgarten's "Enumeratio" but in the "Mantissa," 
written by Fuss, it is mentioned although the synonym 5. vincetoxifolia does not 
appear. According to Steudel Baumgarten's name appears in a manuscript. 

Borbas (Erdesz. Lap. 1882, 880) on the other hand refers to the name as appear- 
ing on a botanical specimen: "I went up therefore to the herbarium of the Hun- 
garian National Museum, where there . . . are also a sufficient number of specimens 
from Transylvania (Meleg-Szamos, Sebes, in the district of Kolos); one sample, 
with the characteristic name of S. vincetoxifolia, once belonged to Baumgarten." 
And again (Termeszet. Fiizet. 1884, 313) : "Finally we may also mention here that 
in the herbarium of the Hungarian National Museum there is an original specimen 
of Syringa vincetoxifolia Baumgarten, which was a gift of Sadler and which is 
nothing else but S. Josikaea. One may still read in the original note written by 
Baumgarten: 'ex loco natali Bujfunu 1834 ab me lecta.' This hitherto unknown 
growing place of S. Josikaea is in the district of Hunyad." 

Flatt (A Josika-Farol, 1891, 15) writes: "SteudePs 'Nomenclator Botanicus' 
contains the 'Syringa vincetoxifolia (sic for vincetoxicifolid) Baumgarten.' As 
Dr. Simonkai advises me, Baumgarten himself had never published the name. 
Steudel probably received it from Sadler, to whom Baumgarten, together with 
the name, had sent his specimen of S. Josikaea" The name, derived from vince- 
toxicum, should be spelled, as indicated by Flatt, vincetoxicifolia. Christ (Garden 
and Forest, 1891, 1. c.) quotes Flatt as follows: "St[e]udel . . . gives under 5. 
Josikaea as a synonym, S. vincetoxifolia, Baumg. Where he found this I cannot tell, 
for Baumgarten did not publish such a name." The information quoted by Christ 
was presumably of earlier date than that just cited in the previous paragraph. 

May (Rev. Hort. 1870, 438) writes: "Pourquoi la qualification Vincetoxifolia 
que lui a donnee Baumgarten? En ce que les feuilles de cette espece renferment 
un principe toxique. Nous signalons ce fait." May entirely misunderstood the 
meaning of the name which implies nothing else but the fact that the leaves are 
similar to those of Vincetoxicum. Even if the name should have been given in 
reference to any property of the plant itself, it would signify just the opposite, 
namely an antidote and not a poisonous quality. 

The date of publication of the original description of Syringa Josikaea has been 
a matter of considerable discussion between Dr. Vincenz von Borbas and Dr. 
Victor Janka (Termeszet. Fiizet. 1884, 313; Erdesz. Lap. 1885, 396). In the first 
of these references Borbas writes as follows: "Generally the 'Flora' or 'All- 
gemeine botanische Zeitung,' 183 1, no. 5, p. 67 is quoted as containing the first 
description of Syringa Josikaea . . . The Editor [Victor Janka], however, offers 
Reichenbach's 'Flora Germanica Excursoria,' 1830, as an earlier source. Since 



38 THE LILAC 

both the 'Flora' and Reichenbach's 'Flora Excursoria' are foreign sources, I beg 
permission to make the following remarks: It is perfectly true that the first vol- 
ume of Reichenbach's work has the imprint of 1830; but the second volume bears 
the imprint of 1830-183 2. On the fly-leaf of this second volume one reads: Acro- 
blastae ed. 1830. This comprises pp. 1-140. Phylloblastae ed. 183 1. This part 
begins on p. 141, and in it on p. 432 there is the description of S. Josikaea. It is 
obvious, therefore, that S. Josikaea could not have seen the world before 1831 in 
Reichenbach's 'Flora Excursoria.' If we take into account that the short descrip- 
tion of S. Josikaea was published in number 5 of the 'Flora' on p. 67, we must 
come to the conclusion that the botanists took note of it earlier here than in the 
slowly progressing work of Reichenbach where it Was printed on p. 432. It is 
not without reason that the botanists quote 'Flora, 183 1, p. 67' and not Reichen- 
bach. A few words about Reichenbach's 'Criticae,' vol. vm. no. 1049, supposed 
to be published also in 1830. I believe that the date of publication is erroneous, 
a year earlier than it should be. For on p. 32 of this work Reichenbach alludes to 
his 'Flora Germanica Excursoria' and in it to the number of S. Josikaea, which, 
as shown above, dates from 1831. We shall stand therefore, also, in the future 
by 'Flora, 1831, p. 67,' as against the anachronism of Reichenbach." Upon this 
Janka comments as follows. "Baron Jacquin gave the first description of Syringa 
Josikaea in Germany, at the first meeting of the physicians and naturalists held 
in Hamburg on September 20, 1830; the report of the botanical conferences of 
this session was published in the February 1, 1831, number of the 'Flora.' Number 
23 of that year, published on June 1, 183 1, prints on p. 400 the following paragraph: 
'To this noble-minded and great man, whose memory will be immortal in the annals 
of science, to Baron Jacquin is Herr Reichenbach also indebted for this plant, 
giving us a characteristic likeness of it in his 'Copper Engravings' under no. 1049, 
almost at the same time that it became known in Germany; we find the plant also 
described on p. 432 of his 'Flora Germanica' which contains, in a truly astonishing 
way, all the newest discoveries.' It is obvious thus that, if we disregard the 'Flora 
Germanica Excursoria,' the first source to quote is Reichenbach's Tconographia 
botanica seu plantae criticae,' volume vm. of which (with the imprint 1830) contains 
Syringa Josikaea." 

The discussion is continued a year later (Erdesz. Lap. 1885, 396) by Borbas 
who repeats certain of his arguments and adds: "In Reichenbach's 'Plantae 
Criticae,' vol. vm. under no. 1049, a good picture of S. Josikaea was published. 
Considering that this volume is closed with no. 1080, it is certain that the picture 
of S. Josikaea appeared toward the very end of 1830, if not in 183 1. But considering 
also the fact that volume vm., p. 32 of the 'Plantae Criticae' already contains a 
reference to the number of -5. Josikaea which was described only in the 'Fl. Germ. 
Excurs.' of 1 83 1, it becomes obvious that the 'Plantae Criticae' of Reichenbach 
was also published in 1831 and the imprint of 1830 merely made it appear a year 
older — a custom which is frequent in books published at the beginning of the year 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 39 

or when an essay read in a certain year falls into the volume of an earlier year. 
Of course, there is no great difference of time between the two descriptions of 
S. Josikaea, between the one in Jacquin films' 'Flora' and the other in Reichen- 
bach's quoted work. Jacquin filius himself tells in 'Flora,' 1831, no. 23, p. 399 
that Reichenbach gave a characteristic picture of S. Josikaea almost at the same time 
that the plant became known in Germany. Note the words : 'almost at the same 
time,' but not before. Thus we do not have any reason to deviate from the source 
established and respected by the botanists; that is, to give up the 'Flora, 1831, 
p. 67' and to quote anachronistically, for the sake of deceiving appearance, 
Reichenbach's work." 

As noted by Borbas the date of publication of Syringa Josikaea in Reichenbach's 
"Flora Germanica Excursoria" is 1831, not 1830 as indicated by the pagination 
and years given on the fly-leaf of the second volume. The description in "Flora" 
p. 67, was published also in the same year, 1831. But I cannot agree with Dr. 
Borbas that Reichenbach's reference in "Plantae Criticae," which is dated 1830, 
to the work "Flora Germanica Excursoria" and to the number, 1049, °f $• Josikaea, 
which appeared in that work in 1831, is proof that the "Plantae Criticae" was not 
issued in 1830. Reichenbach, in the case of works already published, is in the 
habit of giving the page reference, but this he does not do in the instance in ques- 
tion. He was presumably working simultaneously upon the two books and in- 
cluded in the earlier certain facts which were to appear in the later. The pagination 
he was unable to include. 

Proof that the date of publication of the "Plantae Criticae" was 1830 rather 
than 1 83 1 is found in certain advertisements of the book, signed by the author. 
Opposite the title page of "Flora Germanica Excursoria," vol. 1., the Centuria, 
1. to viii., are said to be in press in 1830. In vol. 11. where all the Centuriae are 
noted, 1830 is given as the date of publication of Centuria vni. There appears to 
be no reason to doubt the author's own statement as to the issuance of his book. 
Reichenbach in his "Plantae Criticae" attributes the name to Jacquin fil. 

H. Christ (Garden and Forest, rv. 191, i89i)ina bibliography of 5. Josikaea 
which he states he received from Flatt notes: "Nemzeti taesalbodo [ = Nemzeti 
Tarsalkodo] (1830), p. 344. — Erste quelle! (Eine ungarische Zeitschrift)". Dr. 
Ferdinand Filarsky, director of the botanical section of the Magyar Nemzeti 
Muzeum, Budapest, was so kind as to send me the following information in regard 
to this publication: "The first notice in the 'Nemzeti Tarsalkodo' Jhg. 1830 
(supplement to 'Erdelyi Hirado') Kolosvar (Klausenburg in Transylvania), ed. 
Kisszantoi Pethe Ferencz, no. 43, Oct. 23, 1830, p. 344, reads, faithfully translated 
into German from the Hungarian: 'Klausenburg, the 20 Oct. — In the meetings of 
Naturalists and Physicians of Germany, which were held in September of the current 
year in Hamburg, the Viennese Professor B. Jacquin showed among other dried 
plants also a new Syringa, whose discovery Botany owes to the wife of His Excellency 
'Verwaltungsrat-Vorsitzender' Baron Josika Janos, the Baroness Josika nee Coun- 



40 THE LILAC 

tess Rosalia Csaky, who is particularly interested in this science, and who is highly 
regarded throughout the land. The plant received in honor and memory of the 
Baroness the name Syringa Josikaea, and will also be figured. — (Syringa is called 
in Hungarian Lila-clofa [Lila-Tree of Life] [and] belongs in the group of diandrous 
and monogynous plants. — With us one species 'Kerti borostyan [means in German 
really 'Garden Ivy' but the 'Garden Lilac' is really meant] is generally known.' 
[No signature of the correspondent.] Almost exactly the same may be found in 
Flora od. Allgem. Bot. Ztg. . . . This first source: 'Erdelyi Hirado' was hitherto 
known to us only from the literature. ... At your request I took the trouble to 
look up this old publication in our local library, in which I succeeded and I am 
pleased to be able to help you with the translation." From the above it is evident 
that no description of the plant is given and the first published description is evi- 
dently that of Reichenbach (Iconogr. Bot. PI. Crit., 1. c). 

Reichenbach observes: "Etiam hanc stirpem insignem, Vahlii S. villosae, cujus 
folia in descriptione tantum 'subtus pallida' dixit, fortasse affinem, summae 
benevolentiae ill. auctoris debeo. Indumentum desideratur in nostra, folia fere 
Populi balsamiferae, etiam absque indumento"; this, translated, reads: "This 
handsome species, probably related to S. villosa Vahl, the leaves of which in the 
description are said to be pale only beneath, I owe to the very great kindness of 
the illustrious author [Jacquin fil.]. In our species [S. Josikaea] the pubescence is 
lacking, the leaves almost those of Populus balsamifera, also without pubescence." 
A colored illustration accompanied these observations and the short diagnosis 
reads: "foliis ovali-acuminatis discoloribus." This description is slightly enlarged 
in Reichenbach's later works. 

That which appeared in "Flora" (183 1, 67) is short: "S. foliis ovalibus utrinque 
acutis undulato-rugosis repandis." 

The history of the discovery of S. Josikaea was read by Joseph Franz Jacquin, 
the son of Nikolaus Joseph Jacquin, and commonly called Jacquin filius, before 
a meeting of the botanical section of the German Naturalists and Physicians 
held in Hamburg on September 20, 1830. At the same time Jacquin showed 
dried specimens taken from plants grown in the garden of the Imperial and 
Royal University at Vienna where they had first flowered in 1830. These 
plants had been raised from specimens received from their discoverer, Baroness 
Josika. 

Jacquin (Allg. Gartenz. 1. no. 1, 4, 1833) writes: "The common Lilac (S. vulgaris) 
was known for a long time as native in several localities of Transylvania as Dr. 
Baumgarten in his 'Flora Transylvanica' (vol. 1., p. 16) himself says. The people 
had up to this time held the shrub which grew on the cliffs near Klausenburg in 
the district of Kolos in Transylvania as one of this common kind of Lilac, until . . . 
Rosalia, Baroness von Josika, nee Countess Czaky . . . drew attention to the char- 
acteristics of this shrub as a distinct species and kindly sent several living specimens 
to the garden of the Imperial and Royal University in Vienna, of which one bloomed 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 41 

in the year 1830 and whose description I here present. The shrubs cultivated in 
our garden are 4-5 ft. tall, upright and branchy, the lower part of the trunk has 
a smooth gray bark, the branches are terete, stiff, slightly reddish with white spots, 
and the younger ones somewhat pubescent. The leaves are opposite and spreading, 
somewhat fleshy, oval, cuneate at the base and acuminate at the apex, 3-4 in. 
long, 2 in. or less wide, on the upper surface a saturated green, on the under side 
blue-green, on both sides, however, glabrous, rugose and wrinkled, sinuated at 
the margins, otherwise entire; the petioles are Y. an inch long, canaliculate and 
reddish purple. The flowers grow on the ends of the branches in panicles which are 
a foot long, straight, stiff, and not thickly flowered; the individual peduncles and 
pedicels are opposite or decussate, and each is supported by a persistent bract 
which is heart-shaped, soft-haired, and similar to the leaves only much smaller. 
The color of the flowers is blue-violet, similar to that of S. chinensis, and almost 
wholly scentless or having at least only a very weak scent like a Jasmine. The 
calyx is very small, bell-shaped, green and densely soft-pubescent with violet 
hairs, truncate above and indistinctly f our- toothed ; of the teeth the two opposite 
ones are almost bifid. The corolla is Y an inch long, soft-haired [on such specimens 
as I have examined this has not been found to be the case], infundibuliform, with 
a slightly open mouth and a 4-parted limb whose lobes are spreading (but much 
less than in S. vulgaris), concave and somewhat thick. Stamens two, placed at 
the base of the tube of the corolla, upright, terete, violet [he means the filament] 
and glabrous, the anthers oblong, volatile [aufliegend = lying upon (the filament)], 
double and yellow. The pistil is half as long as the corolla, the ovary egg-shaped, 
glabrous; the style terete, white and glabrous; the stigma soft-haired, almost conical 
and truncate; the capsule is cylindrical and glabrous. In order not to let the memory 
of the discoverer of this plant be lost, the referent decided to give the plant her 
name, and the great meeting of famous . . . botanists . . . agreed to the proposal . . . 
and decided that . . . this . . . should be named Syringa Josikaea. . . . The new 
Syringa grows in Transylvania in the western part of the district of Kolos not far 
from the capital of Klausenburg, on both banks of the river Szekelyo, on steep, 
bare, washed cliffs, where its finer matted roots, torn down from the rocks, with 
some humus, some moss, and Oxalis Acetosella, leave these completely bare. Its 
location is not on very high places, usually hardly 5 fathoms (30 ft.) above the 
river bank, not completely dry, yet not damp, except for a few minutes of sun in 
the morning and as many in the afternoon, always in the shade. There are always 
several shrubs growing closely together. The locality is surrounded by hills covered 
with Fagus sylvatica, Corylus Avellana, Fraxinus, Spiraea, Rosa canina, Ribes 
nigrum, Grossularia and Atragene alpina. The trunk of the Lilac is about 12-18 
ft. high and its circumference is about 2Y2 in. The beautiful flowers are used 
for hair and hat decorations by the peasants of the neighboring villages. The plant 
blooms in May. Although this new Syringa has already been described for several 
years, it is yet so unknown in northern Germany that we thought it worth the 



42 THE LILAC 

trouble to make it known in our circles, and to recommend it especially to the owners 
of gardens as a very beautiful ornamental shrub. ..." 

Dr. Graham, in his "Description of several new or rare plants which have lately 
flowered in the neighborhood of Edinburgh, and chiefly in the Royal Botanic 
Garden" which appeared on September 10, 1833, in the "Edinburgh New Philo- 
sophical Journal," tells of the introduction of -5. Josikaea to Great Britain: "This 
plant was received at the Botanic Garden from Mr. Booth of Hamburg in the end 
of October 1832, and flowered in the open border in the end of May and beginning 
of June. It seems therefore to flower later, and to remain longer in blossom than 
any of the species previously in cultivation, but does not equal any of them in 
beauty. As the name under which we received it was not legible, and as I had not 
seen it any where described, I proposed that it should receive the name of S. Jac- 
quinii, from the botanist who first noticed it. . . ." The colored plate (t. 3278) of 
the "Botanical Magazine" for 1833 was, according to Hooker, received from 
Graham. 

Loudon (Arb. Brit., 1. c.) writes: "Its leaves are . . . shining and lucid green 
above, and white beneath, in the manner of those of the balsam poplar; but of a 
dark green, something like that of the leaves of Chionanthus. ... It was first sent to 
Britain by Messrs. Booth of the Floetbeck [sic] Nurseries; and there are now plants 
in the Garden of the Horticultural Society, in the Edinburgh Botanic Garden and 
in some other collections; so that there can be no doubt but that, by grafting and 
budding, it will soon be as easily procured in the British nurseries as the common 
lilac. The price of plants in the Fulham Nursery is 7s. 6d. each." 

The colored plate in "Maund's Botanist" for 1837 "was taken from a small 
specimen which flowered in the greenhouse of J. T. Jarrett, Esq. of Camerton House, 
in June last, and which it is probable is not so deep in colour as if it had been grown 
in the open air, nor are the panicles of flowers quite so dense." "Paxton's Magazine 
of Botany" for 1838 also lists it, as 5. Josikeii, under "Notices of New and Rare 
Plants in flower in the principal nurseries in the vicinity of London." It was grow- 
ing at "Mr. Low's, Clapton." 

In French literature I have found S. Josikaea first mentioned by Neumann 
(Ann. Fl. Pom. 1834, 1. c.) who notes that M. de Mirbel introduced it to the Jardin 
des Plantes in 1831. The Annales of the "Societe d'horticulture de Paris" of 1834 
records: "On a vu, en mai dernier, pour la premiere fois, ce charmant arbrisseau 
fleurir au Jardin du Roi, a Paris. . . . Ce Lilas a paru au Jardin du Roi en 1829. 
Le pied franc, ayant ete place en terre de Bruyere, a vegete faiblement, et on a 
lieu de penser que cette terre ne lui convient pas. M. Camuset en a grefle des rameaux 
en fente sur le Lilas cornmun plante.en terre ordinaire, et ils ont pousse avec une 
grande vigueur. Pendant tout le temps que ces greffes n'avait que des feuilles, on 
les aurait plutot prises pour des Chionanthus virginiana que pour des Lilas; mais 
lorsqu'en mai, 1834, deux d'entre elles ont montre plusieurs panicules de fleurs, 
l'incertitude a cesse. . . . Le fruit n'est pas encore connu. . . . Deja MM. Cels le 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 43 

possedent et le mettront bientot dans leur commerce." "Le Bon Jardinier" for 
1836 notes it as growing "Au jardin du roi et chez MM. Cels." Pepin (Rev. Hort. 
1846, 1. c.) refers to it as received at the Museum of Natural History, within recent 
years, from M. Jacquin, professor of botany at Vienna. This was presumably a 
later introduction to the Jardin des Plantes than that of M. de Mirbel's. 

In Germany the plant must have been grown, almost as soon as discovered, at 
the Booth nurseries near Hamburg, for it was introduced by them into Great Britain 
in 1832. Bosse's "Vollstandiges Handbuch der Blumengartnerei" notes it as grown 
"In Flottb[eck] u[nd] Hamb[urg]." 

Professor C. S. Sargent (Garden and Forest, 1888, 1. c.) in discussing S. villosa 
Vahl, first wrote of S. Josikaea: "To this species should perhaps be referred, as 
M. Franchet hints in his paper upon the Chinese Lilacs, 5. Josikaea and S. Emodi, 
which as he points out, cannot be separated from dTncarville's plant by the shape 
of the leaves, the character of the inflorescence, or by the shape and size of the 
flowers. . . The plants of S. Josikaea, now widely distributed in gardens, have all 
been propagated from a single plant discovered in a Hungarian garden, but not 
known to be wild in Europe, and probably of Asiatic origin." This statement of 
Dr. Sargent's did not pass unchallenged for, in the same periodical, H. Christ in 
1 89 1 writes: ". . . in an article in Garden and Forest ... it was stated that the 
native country of Syringa Josikaea Jacq., was unknown, and that all the plants in 
cultivation have been derived from a single specimen found in a garden in Hungary. 
The statement is inexact, and the country where this species grows naturally is 
well known. ..US. Josikaea is to be considered an escape from cultivation, 
what known species can it have been derived from? Certainly there does not exist 
in Europe any species from which it can have been derived, a reason sufficiently 
important for rejecting all idea of garden origin. And, as you know, Monsieur 
Franchet has suggested the identity of S. Josikaea and S. Emodi of the Himalayas 
. . . but certainly no one has ever cultivated the Indian plant in Hungary previous 
to the year 1830, when 5. Josikaea was discovered, and even to-day it is very 
doubtful if a single specimen of 5. Emodi can be found in all that district." Christ 
cites numerous authorities to prove that the plant is indigenous to Hungary. 
Dr. Sargent replied in a later issue of the same year: "His [Franchet's] argument, 
however, with regard to the naturalization of the common Lilac in Europe in recent 
years would apply with equal force to S. Josikaea, which is hardly to be distin- 
guished specifically from the widely distributed and variable S. villosa of southern 
and eastern Asia. It is certainly remarkable that these two plants with showy 
flowers, and conspicuous throughout the year from the fact that they spread 
into large masses, should have escaped the attention of botanists and gardeners 
in the Danubian provinces until 1828 and 1830. Instances of plants, even trees 
and shrubs, establishing themselves in a comparatively short time in extra- tropical 
regions remote from their native countries are numerous." He cites the naturaliza- 
tion in the United States of such foreign plants as the European Barberry, the 



44 THE LILAC 

Woadwax (Genista tinctoria), the Cherokee Rose, the Ailanthus and the Melia 
Azedarach. 

S. Josikaea, as noted by Jacquin, was found growing on "steep, bare, washed 
cliffs" on the estate of the Baroness Josika; it was not found in a garden. Jacquin 
did exhibit cultivated specimens but these were taken from plants in the garden of 
the Imperial and Royal University, Vienna which were raised from material, 
probably plants, received from the Baroness Josika. 

Charles Flatt in his "A Josika-Farol" (1891, 8) writes: "I believe that the phrase 
'CultaHermannstadt' (spread by the herbariums of Vienna and Breslau) prompted 
Franchet to identify S. Josikaea with S. Emodi, with a plant that grows on 
the Himalayas (Mons Emodus, Kardong). . . [See 5. emodi]. I had attacked 
Franchet's standpoint, but an article written in Hungarian can do little among 
foreign scholars. Thus the mistaken notion concerning our shrub, launched by 
Franchet, found ready credence abroad. Even Mr. Sargent, the excellent American 
dendrologist, had accepted Franchet's view and in the 'Garden and Forest' 
(published in New York) stated that the S. Josikaea is merely a garden product, 
which grew only once, and only in a single garden in Hungary. To combat this 
erroneous idea I have sent live specimens to Bohemia, Bavaria, Switzerland and 
America. I have also decided to publish my articles and correspondence relating to 
this plant in German. And I mention here with satisfaction that such scholars as 
Ascherson, Bolle, Christ, Prantl, Wiesbauer, etc., all condemn Franchet's essay. 
Mr. Sargent, too, has promised me that he will rectify his statement made in the 
'Garden and Forest.'" 

Franchet's monograph, "Observations sur les Syringa du nord de la Chine" 
met with considerable criticism in Hungary, and Flatt went into a comparison of 
S. emodi, S. villosa and S. Josikaea with as much accuracy as the material at hand 
permitted. He published an article entitled "The Syringa Josikaea as an indepen- 
dent species" (Erdesz. Lap. 1887, 568-581) which he concluded as follows: "These 
are my chief reflections upon Franchet's essay. That he had identified S. Josikaea 
with 5. Emodi was due, in my belief, to the fact that he had never known, at least 
never known well, our shrub. S. Josikaea is easy to distinguish from S. villosa 
by the fact that the leaves of the latter are covered underneath with long hairs; 
that the number of the secondary nerves of its leaves are 6 or 7 ; that the branches 
of the shrub are very brittle and, when young, dark yellow. Contrarily, the lower 
surface of the leaves of S. Josikaea, though grayish white, is not even pubescent; 
the number of the secondary veins are 8 to 11; the young branches are flexible, 
and, when young, light gray. S. Josikaea is easy to distinguish from S. Emodi by 
the fact that the flowers of the latter are usually white, and those of S. Josikaea 
violet; that the leaves of our shrub are not attenuate but rounded at their base; 
that the flowers [the translator has inserted here the word flowers although I do 
not find it (viragai) occurring in this part of the text and believe that Flatt is still 
talking of the leaves] have no shingles [murvai = shingles; I do not understand the 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 45 

use of this term] ; and finally that in S. Josikaea the lobes of the corolla are at least 
four times shorter than the tube of the corolla, and not almost of the same length 
as the tube. Everything taken together, I dare to say that 5". Josikaea is and 
shall remain a distinctly independent species, the endemic plant of our country, — 
even after the onslaught of M. Franchet." In his "A Josika-Farol" Flatt adds: 
"Anyone can see at first glance that this plant [S. emodi] is not identical with our 
S. Josikaea. The leaves of S. Emodi are pointed at the base where they run into 
the petiole; whereas the leaves of S. Josikaea are rounded. The color is the same 
in both plants. But very conspicuous is the difference in the flowers. The tube 
of the corolla of S. Emodi is elongated, narrow, and the comparatively long lobes 
of the corolla are always turned back in the shape of a plate; the tube of 5. Josikaea, 
on the other hand, is wide, and the comparatively short lobes of the corolla are 
always erect. In S. Emodi the filaments are longer than the tube of the corolla, 
so that the anthers protrude, whereas in S. Josikaea the filaments are shorter and the 
anthers are always hidden in the tube of the corolla. To my knowledge, no one has 
hitherto made this distinction, though it holds true for the cultivated specimens 
also, which shows the constancy of this mark." 

Borbas (Erdesz. Lap. 1887, 251) also disagrees in part with Franchet's mono- 
graph: "According to Franchet, the lilacs with unicolor leaves, that is, S. vulgaris 
and S. persica, have no native countries. The lilacs with discolor leaves, like 
S. Emodi or S. Josikaea, on the other hand, still grow in a wild state. However, 
Franchet's knowledge of the botanical conditions of our country is insufficient; 
had he ever been in the district of Krasso-Szoreny, he would readily believe that 
S. vulgaris still grows in a wild state. Thus if Franchet's proposition that S. Emodi 
Wallich 1828 is identical with 5. Josikaea Jacq. fil. 1831 is true, then the geo- 
graphical area of this beautiful shrub has become larger, but the plant itself has lost 
its special significance as an endemic Hungarian plant. For my part, I confess 
that I always had doubts whenever I thought of the endemism of the plant. It 
seemed to me curious that such a conspicuous shrub. . . should grow exclusively 
on the border of Transylvania and Hungary, in the districts of Maramaros, Bereg 
and Ung, mostly in the land of the Rumanians and Ruthenians." 

The question of which name, S. emodi or 5. Josikaea, should have priority, 
provided the two plants are considered to be the same species, is discussed at length 
by Borbas in this article. He arrives at the conclusion that "If we accept Wallich's 
catalogue as the first source of his Indian plants, together with the names which he 
had given them, then the dates of these names must be 1828." This would have 
given S. emodi priority over S. Josikaea. 

This question at the present time loses significance for there appears to be no 
doubt that the two Lilacs are distinct species. 

Charles Flatt (Erdesz. Lap. 1887, 568) in an article entitled "The Syringa 
Josikaea as an independent species" enumerated the localities where the plant had 
been found up to 1887. He refers to Kitaibel's S. prunifolia, to the discovery of 



46 THE LILAC 

the plant by the Baroness Josika "about twenty years later," and to Baumgarten's 
5. vincetoxifolia, and continues: "This [the locality presumably where the Baroness 
Josika found her plant] was the only known place of growth until 1854. The several 
specimens in the Hungarian National Museum bear the inscription: 'Culta 
Hermannstadt' ; that is, the plant was merely cultivated at Nagy-Szeben 
(Hermannstadt), but otherwise this city is out of the question as an original place 
of growth. In 1854 Victor Janka discovered it between Fekete-to and Banffy- 
Hunyad [Flatt refers to Janka's article in the Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. ( = Wochenbl.) 
rv. 188 (1854)]. But all these places are in Transylvania, not in Hungary proper. 
Another twenty-seven years passed before new places of growth of S. Josikaea were 
discovered. In 1880 Lajos Simonkai found it near Fekete-to (Termeszet. Fiizet. 
v. 44 [1882]); this was the first proof that the shrub grows in Hungary proper. 
Since then several people have found S. Josikaea; thus: In 1881 Gustavus 
Tomcsanyi, forester in the district of Ung, in the valleys of Kis-Pasztely and 
Lyuta (Klein in Termeszet. Kozlony, [xiii. 314], 1881, July; in Bot. Centralbl. 
vni. [ = vti. no. 4] 124 [1881]. — Borbas in Erd6sz. Lap. 1882, 880). In 1884 Vincenz 
von Borbas, after reading Kitaibel's manuscript, maintains that Kitaibel's S. 
prunifolia is identical with S. Josikaea (Borbas in Termeszet. Fiizet. 1884, 75; 
in Erdesz. Lap. 1885, 396). In May, 1885, 1 succeeded in finding it around 'Lunka 
Kotuni' at Remecz (Erdesz. Lap. 1886, 141). The same year Victor Janka found 
it at Kelecseny, in the district of Maramaros (Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. [xxxv. no. 9, 
313] 1885) and Dr. Lajos Simonkai near the source of the Aranyos, between Szkeri- 
sora and Albak [Flatt refers here to "an independent publication of Dr. Simonkai"]. 
Last year, in 1886, I found again two new places of growth: one in the Sipotye 
valley, at Remecz, at the foot of the 'Magas' mountain, near the so-called Pareu- 
Fregucar; this is the richest place of growth with about a thousand young shrubs; 
and another in the woods of Belenyes, under a rock called 'piatra Bulzi', on the 
bank of the river Jad. I have collected several hundred specimens in these places, 
including branches with fruit, which Dr. Vincenz von Borbas has forwarded for the 
'Flora exsicc. Austr.-Hung.' The same year Mr. John Csato, Vice-Sheriff of 
Nagy-Enyed, collected specimens in the valley of the Aranyos, around Albak, 
having also published an article about it (Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. [xxxvi. no. 7] 
249, 1886). Thus we know so far that 5. Josikaea grows in four districts (Comitats) 
of our country. And if my request, voiced in the 'Erdeszeti Lapok' (1886, 146) 
gains attention, I am convinced that we shall soon hear of other places of growth 
also." 

Other Hungarian botanists have later testified to the spontaneity of 5. Josikaea 
in Hungary. Alexander Michalus (Erdesz. Lap. 1887, 982) writes: "As Mr. Flatt 
remarks, he found it in 1885 and 1886 in the vicinity of Remecz; before him Victor 
Janka found it between Fekete-to and Banffy-Hunyad, and finally Dr. Simonkai 
found it around Szkerisora and Albak; thus this plant has been found in three- 
fourths of the mountain group of the Vlegyasza. I myself came across it in June 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 47 

in the woods of Petrosz, a part of the bishoprical estate of Belenyes, along the 
Golbina (Galbina) (a tributary of the Fekete Koros) , where this receives the brook 
Bulz; I also found it in the valleys of the Aleo and Rumunyasza, both rivers being 
branches of the Golbina. ..." 

The conclusions reached by Pax (Engler and Drude, Veg. Erde, 1898, 1908, 
1. c.) in regard to the plant's habitat are commented upon by Lajos Thaisz (Magy. 
Bot. Lap. 1909, 217) as follows: "Dr. Ferdinand Pax in his 'GrundziAge der 
Pflanzenverbreitung in den Karpathen,' p. 117, doubts that the S. Josikaea would 
grow in the district of Ung. On p. 211 of the second volume of the same work, 
published in 1908, he not only upholds this doubt, but extends it to the whole area 
of the Sylvan Carpathians. As he says: 'Die Zweifel die ich iiber das Vorkommen 
der Syringa Josikaea in den Waldkarpathen (Bd. 1. 117) ausserte, scheinen mir 
auch heute noch nicht behoben zu sein.' I find it necessary to dispel this doubt, 
especially because it was made public in such a significant work as that of Pax. 
The clarification of the problem is especially important, because the plant-geograph- 
ical significance of S. Josikaea gains added weight from the fact that the western 
border of its territory is near to the region where we must look for the dividing line 
between the eastern and western flora, even to-day after the publication of Pax's 
work. . . I began my investigation two years ago, when I asked Mr. Nandor 
Rochlitz, Councillor of Forestry at Ungvar, to send me wild growing Lilacs from 
the district. Soon I received a beautiful flowering specimen with this label: l S. 
Josikaea taken at the woods of Holodniszti at the village Sohat, in the district of 
Ung.' Then I turned to Mr. Gustav Tomcsanyi, who informed me that it was he 
who had discovered the Syringa in 1881 in three different places. He had sent in 
that year live roots both to the Botanical Garden of Budapest and to the garden 
of the Academy at Selmeczbanya. He had also distributed several herbarium 
specimens. . . Professor Alexander (Sandor) Magocsi-Dietz has also told me that 
he himself collected 5. Josikaea in the county of Ung, at the village of Oroszmocsar. 
Flatt, Borbas and later Magocsi-Dietz, all wrote about S. Josikaea being found in the 
district of Bereg; they rely upon Kitaibel's manuscript now preserved in the 
Hungarian National Museum. Kitaibel himself, however, had never seen the 
plant; he merely heard from his colleague Dr. Bulla, that there was a species of 
Lilac between Felso-Hrabonitza and Pudpolocz. . . . Till now it was merely a sus- 
picion and not a certainty that S. Josikaea grows in the district of Bereg; but last 
summer I collected at Szarvashaza numerous live specimens which, for the sake 
of greater authenticity I distributed among my botanist colleagues. The place 
of growth at Szarvashaza is noteworthy also for the reason that it lies only at a 
distance of 5 km. from the place of growth given by Bulla and Kitaibel. ... I am 
indebted for the discovery to . . . Paul Ratz, head of the State Model-Estate at 
Also-Vereczke. He told me that according to his personal observation, there is 
a Lilac at several different places in the northern part of the district of Bereg. He 
himself accompanied me to Szarvashaza, and I accept as facts also his data about 



48 THE LILAC 

the other places of growth. How frequent is the Hungarian Lilac in northern 
Bereg is shown also by the fact that it is also widely used as a cultivated plant. ..." 
Thaisz enumerates in detail, for "plant geographical reasons," all the known 
places where S. Josikaea grows in the following sections of the Sylvan Carpathians : 
I. The water basin of the river Ung (district of Ung) ; II. The water basin of the 
Latorcza (district of Bereg); III. The water basin of the Nagyag (district of 
Maramaros) ; he also enumerates localities under four sections in the mountains 
of Bihar and in the Alps of Gyalu : I. The water basin of the Sebes Koros (district 
of Bihar) ; II. The water basin of Fekete Koros (district of Bihar) ; III. The water 
basin of the Aranyos (district of Torda-Aranyos) ; IV. The water basin of the 
Szamos (district of Kolos). He also mentions another place of growth, cited by 
Baumgarten, at "Bujfunu, a name which cannot be found on the map." He notes: 
"According to Janka (Termeszet. Fuzet. vm. 313 [1884]) and to Javorka this 
place must be in the district of Hunyad, and is identical with the village Boj 
(formerly Bojbunu)." And he summarizes: "As we have seen, the places of growth 
in the Sylvan Carpathians fall into three areas and those in the Transylvanian 
Middle-Mountains into four. Between the two territories there is a wide distance." 

Later (Magy. Bot. Lap. 1912, 236) Thaisz supplements this data by citing 
further localities in the following sections: I. The water basin of the Lotorcza 
(district of Bereg); II. The water basin of the Stryj in Galicia. He notes: "The 
discovery of places of growth in Galicia is, I believe, quite important. The flora 
of Austria has become enriched with an interesting plant, though, at the same time, 
the endemism of S. Josikaea has changed. We cannot regard it henceforth as a 
purely Hungarian shrub. ..." 

Antal Guylas (A Syringa Josikaea Jacq. fil., es z,Syringa Emodi Wallich, 1909, 
1. c.) writes that he studied S. Josikaea growing in a wild state and his article con- 
tains photographs of such plants. 

Among spontaneous specimens of S. Josikaea which are in the Arnold Arboretum 
herbarium are five collected by Flatt. Three of flowers and foliage bear the number 
4103. They were collected in May, 1890, and bear the notation: "Hungaria, cottu 
Bihar, ad margines sylvarum, prope pagum Remecz, in loc. petros. ad fluvium Jad, 
ad pedem montis Magos. ..." The two additional Flatt specimens bear his label 
but no notation. There is also an example collected by Csato at Albak, dated 
June 5, 1886, and one (no. 887) gathered by Simonkai in May- June from "Hun- 
gariae cottus Bihar. In silvis prope pagum Remecz." 

Curiously, although first found in Hungary, and called commonly the Hun- 
garian Lilac, at the present day, and according to the divisions of the Balkan 
States following the peace terms, 5. Josikaea, so far as I know, does not grow 
spontaneously in what is now Hungary. Bereg, whence came Kitaibel's S. pruni- 
folia, once in Hungary, is now in Czechoslovakia; the S. vincetoxifolia recorded by 
Baumgarten from Hunyad, once in Hungary, is now in Rumania; Kolosvar (in 
the German Klausenburg and in the Rumanian Cluj) where Countess Josika 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 49 

found her plants, once in Hungary, is now in Rumania ; Maramaros and Ung, once 
in Hungary are now in Czechoslovakia; Fekete-to, where Simonkai found the 
plant in 1880, and which Flatt cites as the first record of the plant from Hungary 
proper, is now in Jugo-Slavia; and Galicia which Thaisz mentions as important 
because in Austria, is now in Poland. It is quite possible that the exclusion of 
present Hungary from the regions where this Lilac is indigenous may be inexact, 
because of the numerous localities from which this plant has been recorded, and 
because of the difficulty, with such maps as are available, of locating with certainty 
the boundaries of many of the Balkan districts as well as some of the smaller towns, 
etc. Moreover the names, as in the case of Kolosvar just cited, may appear quite 
differently if given in Hungarian, in German or in Rumanian. So far as I know, 
however, and any corrections of the statement would be valuable, the fact is as 
stated. 

Among cultivated specimens are many from plants growing in the neighbor- 
hood of Boston, Massachusetts; and in addition two (nos. 982 and 961) collected 
by George Nicholson on May 24, 1880, from the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; 
one (no. 13) from the arboretum of von Sivers at Roemershof, Russia (collected 
by C. K. Schneider in 1904), as well as others from Scheitniger Park, Breslau, 
Silesia, from the Botanic Garden of the Forestry Institute at Muenden, Hanover, 
from the Botanic Garden at Vienna, and elsewhere. 

Certain collectors have given information in regard to the companion plants 
found with the wild 5. Josikaea; thus Janka (Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. 1885, 1. c.) 
writes: ". . . we came to the acidulous spring . . . which fills the marsh of the 
valley bottom in the middle of which we found ... 5. Josikaea growing abundantly 
but hidden between Alnus glutinosa, A. incana, Rhamnus Frangula and Salix 
aurita, all of which exceeded the Syringa in the number of individuals"; Csato 
(Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. 1886, 1. c.) refers to it as growing "between alders, willows 
and firs on the right bank of the Aranyos . . ."; Flatt (Erdesz. Lap. 1886, 1. c.) 
found it mixed with "beech-wood, or to put it more correctly, beech-shrubs." 

Flatt considers in detail, in the same article, the type of locality where 
S. Josikaea is found: "Now supplementing my personal observations with the 
topographical and geological data of the Sebes-Volgy around Csucsa, of the Koros- 
Volgy around Fekete-to, and the Jad-Volgy around Remecz and Belenyes (I do 
not know the conditions in the district of Ung) , I come to the following conclusions : 
1. S. Josikaea is apt to grow on river-banks, or at least nearby. 2. Stony mountain- 
slopes, a ground of disintegrating rocks, unshaded by bigger trees, is its most 
fitting place. 3. It is doubtful if it ever could vegetate in deep, rich, mouldering 
soil. 4. Its most probable place of growth is a woody country where the stratum 
is composed of granite, limestone and graywacke." Again (Erdesz. Lap. 1887, 
1. c.) Flatt gives certain conclusions: "1. A glance at the map of our country brings 
before our eyes the fact that S. Josikaea, according to the known places of growth, 
grows between 40 and 42 longitudinal and 46.7 and 48.7 latitudinal degrees, that 



50 THE LILAC 

is within the area of two square degrees. 2. Within this space, it grows where the 
average temperature in spring is 8-10 Celsius, in summer 16-21 C.°, in fall 8-1 1 
C.°, and in winter 3-4 C.° 3. The average yearly precipitation in the known places 
of growth is 85-100 cm. 4. The altitude is 300-500 m. 5. The stratum is mostly 
composed of granite, limestone, and graywacke. Finally 6. S. Josikaea grows on 
banks of rivers, or at least nearby." Michalus (Erdesz. Lap. 1887, 1. c.) states: "Its 
altitude at the Golbina is 490 m.; at Rumunyasza 660 m., and, in accordance with 
Mr. Flatt's observation, it is found also here by the water-side, some parts of it 
drooping in the river." Thaisz (Magy. Bot. Lap. 1909, 1. c.) tells us that "In the 
Sylvan Carpathians S. Josikaea grows in sand-stone. It is much more difficult to 
determine the composition of the stratum in the Transylvanian Mountains, because 
there are all sorts of rocks there. We do not have sufficiently detailed geological 
maps at our disposal." Also he notes: "In its wild state, it is not a shrub, but a 
3-5 m. high small tree, growing in the neighborhood of alders and willows. Its 
soil is always a swamp along a brook, a flood land, or some other watery place. 
Not large and wide, but narrow and stern valleys are its home." The same writer 
in a later article (Magy. Bot. Lap. 191 2, 1. c.) notes of the conditions under which 
it grows in Galicia: "The Syringa grows in Galicia under conditions similar to 
those in Hungary, in shady moors along brooks, together with alders and willows; 
the ground is composed of the sand-stone of the Carpathians." 

In his article "The Syringa Josikaea as an independent species" (Erdesz. Lap. 
1887, 1. c.) Flatt thus describes the plant: "The roots of our shrub are strong and 
creeping, proving that the plant has to gain its nourishment from rocky ground. 
Root-fibres spring sometimes from distant parts of the tap-root; a sign of the 
struggles of the plant which, amid the disintegrating rocks, holds on as it can. I 
dug up many shrubs and the roots were always alike; considering the nature of the 
places of growth, this could not be otherwise. I have found many old specimens, 
though the larger number of the plants were young. These old specimens are often 
covered with thick moss; they are crooked, veritable cripples. I took exact measure- 
ments from such an old shrub. They are: Trunk . . . 15.5 cm. in diameter. Where 
the two lowest branches start . . . 22.0 cm. in diameter. Diameter of one branch 
. . . 10.0 cm. Diameter of other branch ... 4.5 cm. This shrub is 3.5 m. tall, 
thus being an unusually strong specimen; but I wish to note here that there are 
much taller specimens, the measurements of which are smaller." 

In the same article Flatt writes that "The buds have an oval conical shape and 
are pointed; the terminal buds are always larger; the lateral buds point outwards; 
they are rust-brown, glabrous. The scales are acute." He notes that in Dietz's 
"Key to Buds and Leaves" (Erdesz. Lap. 1882, 1. c.) S. Josikaea is not considered. 
Dietz does, however, note of its leaves in this key: "Leaves hard, wrinkled, oval or 
rounded lanceolate (often in heart-shaped form), upper surface dark, lower surface 
pale light green, blade mostly runs into the stalk." Borbas (Erdesz. Lap. 1882, 
1. c.) comments upon this: "Alexander Dietz . . . writes that the leaves of 5. 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 51 

Josikaea are often heart-shaped and that 'their blades in most cases run into the 
stalk.' I cannot visualize or even draw such a leaf; but the leaves of S. Josikaea 
are not heart-shaped. If there is an approach to heart-shape (I have never seen it 
in any specimen) this must be the rarity; and only an approach to heart-shape can 
be in question." In Schneider's "Dendrologische Winterstudien" (1903) are found 
figures of its winter buds. 

The discussion in regard to the endemism of S. Josikaea appears to have aroused 
the pride of the Hungarian botanists and the evidence which they produced would 
seem to be conclusive. Certainly few, if any, species of Lilac have been recorded 
from so many spontaneous sources. 

The plant must have been a hardy one for in their zeal to obtain specimens the 
plant appears occasionally to have been somewhat harshly treated. Thus Csato 
(Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. 1886, 1. c.) wrote: "... I learned that the sought-for shrub 
grew in the vicinity and immediately mounted with my attendants the horses which 
were being held ready, and rode to the spot. We found the Syringa to my great joy 
in the most wonderful bloom and began to collect them at once. But unfortunately 
it began to rain very hard, so that I, wrapping myself in my raincoat, could not see 
what my guides were doing. These latter, seeing that two presiding judges were 
accompanying me, decided to perform something obliging and serviceable and began 
to cut down the most beautiful shrubs. Happily I soon noticed their procedure 
with horror and stopped it right away. The people however insisted that it was 
not necessary to spare this shrub for it multiplies as easily as a willow. ..." 

Nor can one be amazed at the surprise of the pastor noted by Janka (Oesterr, 
Bot. Zeitschr. 1885, 1. c.) : "Several times I thought I saw it, but it soon turned out 
to be an Evonymus or a Rhamnus Frangula. . . . Now there remained nothing to 
do but to explore the village itself. There the pastor was not a little surprised when, 
after only a very short introduction, immediately paying almost no more attention 
to him, I rushed out in the pouring rain, into the little garden at whose entrance 
I let out a cry of joy as I found that the Syringa of which they had told me . . . was 
S. Josikaea. ... I rushed upon it with drawn knife and cut off three large-leaved 
shoots. There were hardly twice as many; the old trunk; nearly a span thick, 
was already nearly cut down. ..." I confess to sympathy for the pastor's 
garden. 

Several writers have commented upon the fact that large specimens of S. 
Josikaea were rarely found. Michalus (Erd6sz. Lap. 1887, 1. c.) writes: "I was 
surprised to see that although the surrounding country was uninhabited, all the 
branches of the shrubs were cut down. Upon my inquiries I learned that the 
people of the villages call S. Josikaea 'Lemne ventuluj' and that they use it for 
a cure upon paralysed parts of the body. ... I have not found any large specimen. 
The reason for this is, perhaps, to be looked for in the fact that the people, on account 
of its supposed medicinal effect, continue to cut it. The largest specimen was 1.5 
m. high, and at the bottom n cm. wide. . . ." 



52 THE LILAC 

Flatt (Erdesz. Lap. 1886, 1. c.) questions: ". . . why is S. Josikaea so rare? I 
am convinced that if the Syringa or 'Lunka Kotuni' at Remecz were not where 
they are, but nearer the village, they would have disappeared long since. We know 
well enough, how mischievous peasant urchins treat the ordinary lilac, at spring- 
time, when the plant is in flower. They are not content to pick five to ten clusters; 
he is the happiest who has the largest branch . . . thus before a general interest in 
the plant could have struck root, children's mischief had already destroyed it. 
For this reason I do not believe that 5. Josikaea will be found at a new place, near 
a village, or near any much-frequented location. From such places the S. Josikaea, 
if ever there was one there, has long since disappeared." 

In the same article Flatt makes some interesting comments upon the local 
names for this Lilac: "It is worth mentioning that the known places of growth of 
S. Josikaea are all in the Rumanian districts of Hungary; and that the village of 
O-Kemencz, in the county of Ung, is inhabited by Ruthenians. Therefore, seeking 
information from the 'people' we cannot go far with the Hungarian language. 
I have noticed that around the villages where 5. Josikaea grows the people know 
the plant but think it is identical with the Common Lilac. The inhabitants of 
Csucsa, as Lajos Simkovics [later Simonkai] (Termeszet. Fuzet. 1881, 44) notes, 
call it in Rumanian 'Melin.' The word has its meaning. But the Rumanians of 
Remecz (and generally all the Rumanians in Hungary proper) call it 'Kelin.' 
It is possible that the difference comes from the difference between the Rumanian 
dialects of Hungary and Transylvania. The Rumanian of Hungary calls also the 
Common Lilac 'Kelin.' The word 'Melin' appeals more to me; it is a more 
plausible name. * Kelin' (I have made many inquiries) has no meaning at all; 
on the other hand, the root of 'Melin' is 'mel' (in all probability a Greek root, 
jue\i= honey). [In a footnote he adds: "The Rumanian is a Latin tongue; and, 
just as in Latin, there are many Greek words in the Rumanian."] Perhaps the 
name came from the honey smell of the flowers of the Common Lilac. I remember 
that in my childhood we used to suck the corolla of the garden Syringa . . . perhaps 
the name 'Melin' was given because of the honey of the flower. A third Rumanian 
name is 'Scumpie,' which means preciousness, dearness (scump = dear) . ... I 
who have lived so many years among the Rumanians know very well how super- 
stitious this illiterate people is, especially in regard to medicine. It is the curing 
quality of the plant which is 'Scumpie,' or preciousness. And perhaps there is sense 
in their idea, for they really use it for medicine. The leaves of the garden Syringa 
and of S. Josikaea are bitter, and bitter stuffs are generally used against stomach 
troubles. Thus, when a baby is ill, they bathe it in boiled Syringa leaves. They give 
the same juice to their cattle, as a cure for colic. The Rumanians of the Hungarian 
parts use the Common Lilac for their quackery ; whereas the Rumanians of Remecz, 
Fekete-to and Csucsa (in the absence of the Common Lilac) use S. Josikaea which 
they take to be identical with the Common Lilac. B. H., apothecary, has told me 
that the Rumanian peasants often ask in his shop for Lilac leaves (which of course 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 53 

they do not sell). A fourth Rumanian name is 'Orgonjan;' it is obvious that this 
word comes from 'orgona,' the Hungarian word for Lilac." 

A. Guylas (A Syringa Josikaea Jacq. fil. es a Syringa Emodi Wallich, 1909, 
1. c.) has written on the same subject: "S. Josikaea is one of those plants whose 
native names have grown into a veritable labyrinth. A wrong but very common 
Hungarian name is 'Havasi Borostyan' (Transylvania) . . . S. Josikaea grows 
with few exceptions, in the mountain localities inhabited by Wallachians. It is 
therefore natural that it should have more Rumanian names than Hungarian. The 
Rumanian names are closely connected with the curative power which the people 
believe it contains, and the use which is made of it according to the experiences of the 
people. Everywhere that it grows the people know it and give it different names. 
As a plant which blossoms [with showy flowers] it naturally made itself noticeable. 
The Transylvanian Rumanian calls it 'Melin' (Csucsa), the Hungarian 'Kelinin' 
and 'Orgojan' (Remecz). The name Tenye' used in the valley of the warm 
Szamos River is not a specific name as the Rumanians use it for every plant. Their 
favorite name is that of 'Forest Lilac' (borostean de padure) by which one 
differentiates it from the 'Village Lilac' (borostean de sat) which means the 
S. vulgaris. In the villages near the Aranyos River, Vidra, Sckerisora and other 
places, it is called 'Skrintye.' In the forest of Belenyesi it is called 'Lemneven- 
tuluj' (wind tree), in the vicinity of Remecz and Csucsa, 'Scumpie.' [Guylas 
notes that this was also cited by Baumgarten, Enum. Stirp. Transsilv. 1. 16, 1816. 
In Guylas' Hungarian text Baumgarten's name is spelt Szkum pine and in his 
German text Skum pine.] These last two names were given to S. Josikaea for the 
healing power of her bark, leaves and young shoots. The meaning of 'Scumpie' 
is connected with the high cost of the medicine which is made from the plant. . . . 
The Rumanian people use the dried young shoots as a medicine for people as well 
as for animals, especially for stomach ache and paralysis. A person suffering from 
stomach ache drinks the juice boiled out of the leaves of the Syringa and one 
suffering from paralysis rubs the warm juice upon the sick limb. The effective 
substance of the plant is Syringin (C l7 H 2 40 2 ) which Kromayer first discovered 
and which is present in fairly large quantities in the bark and also in the 
mesophyll of the leaves." Guylas tells of his own experiments in extracting 
Syringin. 

S. Josikaea has been called by many common names. In French we find it as 
Lilas de Pensylvanie (Oudin, Cat. 1841, 22), Lilas feuilles de chionante (A. 
Leroy, Cat. 1852, 59), but the names most frequently applied are Lilas de Josika, 
Lilas Josika, and Lilas de Hongrie; in German Willkomm (Forstl. Fl. Deutschl., 
1. c.) cites Josika's Hollunder, but ordinarily Josika Flieder and ungarischer Flieder, 
both cited by Hartwig and Riimpler (Vilmorin's Blumengartn., 1. c), are used; in 
English Deep Flowered German Lilac is cited in the "Botanical Magazine" (lx. 
t. 3278, 1833) and by Sweet (Hort. Brit. ed. 3, 1. c), Chionanthus-leaved Lilac is 
occasionally used (Prince, Cat. 1 844-1 845, 70), but Lady Josika's Lilac, Josika's 



52 THE LILAC 

Flatt (Erdesz. Lap. 1886, 1. c.) questions: ". . . why is 5. Josikaea so rare? I 
am convinced that if the Syringa or 'Lunka Kotuni' at Remecz were not where 
they are, but nearer the village, they would have disappeared long since. We know 
well enough, how mischievous peasant urchins treat the ordinary lilac, at spring- 
time, when the plant is in flower. They are not content to pick five to ten clusters; 
he is the happiest who has the largest branch . . . thus before a general interest in 
the plant could have struck root, children's mischief had already destroyed it. 
For this reason I do not believe that S. Josikaea will be found at a new place, near 
a village, or near any much-frequented location. From such places the S. Josikaea, 
if ever there was one there, has long since disappeared." 

In the same article Flatt makes some interesting comments upon the local 
names for this Lilac: "It is worth mentioning that the known places of growth of 
5. Josikaea are all in the Rumanian districts of Hungary; and that the village of 
O-Kemencz, in the county of Ung, is inhabited by Ruthenians. Therefore, seeking 
information from the 'people' we cannot go far with the Hungarian language. 
I have noticed that around the villages where S. Josikaea grows the people know 
the plant but think it is identical with the Common Lilac. The inhabitants of 
Csucsa, as Lajos Simkovics [later Simonkai] (Termeszet. Fuzet. 1881, 44) notes, 
call it in Rumanian 'Melin.' The word has its meaning. But the Rumanians of 
Remecz (and generally all the Rumanians in Hungary proper) call it 'Kelin.' 
It is possible that the difference comes from the difference between the Rumanian 
dialects of Hungary and Transylvania. The Rumanian of Hungary calls also the 
Common Lilac 'Kelin.' The word 'Melin' appeals more to me; i't is a more 
plausible name. 'Kelin' (I have made many inquiries) has no meaning at all; 
on the other hand, the root of 'Melin' is 'mel' (in all probability a Greek root, 
/xeXt = honey). [In a footnote he adds: "The Rumanian is a Latin tongue; and, 
just as in Latin, there are many Greek words in the Rumanian."] Perhaps the 
name came from the honey smell of the flowers of the Common Lilac. I remember 
that in my childhood we used to suck the corolla of the garden Syringa . . . perhaps 
the name 'Melin' was given because of the honey of the flower. A third Rumanian 
name is 'Scumpie,' which means preciousness, dearness (scump = dear) . ... I 
who have lived so many years among the Rumanians know very well how super- 
stitious this illiterate people is, especially in regard to medicine. It is the curing 
quality of the plant which is 'Scumpie,' or preciousness. And perhaps there is sense 
in their idea, for they really use it for medicine. The leaves of the garden Syringa 
and of S. Josikaea are bitter, and bitter stuffs are generally used against stomach 
troubles. Thus, when a baby is ill, they bathe it in boiled Syringa leaves. They give 
the same juice to their cattle, as a cure for colic. The Rumanians of the Hungarian 
parts use the Common Lilac for their quackery; whereas the Rumanians of Remecz, 
Fekete-to and Csucsa (in the absence of the Common Lilac) use S. Josikaea which 
they take to be identical with the Common Lilac. B. H., apothecary, has told me 
that the Rumanian peasants often ask in his shop for Lilac leaves (which of course 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 53 

they do not sell). A fourth Rumanian name is 'Orgonjan;' it is obvious that this 
word comes from 'orgona,' the Hungarian word for Lilac." 

A. Guylas (A Syringa Josikaea Jacq. fil. es a Syringa Emodi Wallich, 1909, 
1. c.) has written on the same subject: "S. Josikaea is one of those plants whose 
native names have grown into a veritable labyrinth. A wrong but very common 
Hungarian name is 'Havasi Borostyan' (Transylvania) ... 5. Josikaea grows 
with few exceptions, in the mountain localities inhabited by Wallachians. It is 
therefore natural that it should have more Rumanian names than Hungarian. The 
Rumanian names are closely connected with the curative power which the people 
believe it contains, and the use which is made of it according to the experiences of the 
people. Everywhere that it grows the people know it and give it different names. 
As a plant which blossoms [with showy flowers] it naturally made itself noticeable. 
The Transylvanian Rumanian calls it 'Melin' (Csucsa), the Hungarian 'Kelinin' 
and 'Orgojan' (Remecz). The name Tenye' used in the valley of the warm 
Szamos River is not a specific name as the Rumanians use it for every plant. Their 
favorite name is that of 'Forest Lilac' (borostean de padure) by which one 
differentiates it from the 'Village Lilac' (borostean de sat) which means the 
S. vulgaris. In the villages near the Aranyos River, Vidra, Sckerisora and other 
places, it is called 'Skrintye.' In the forest of Belenyesi it is called 'Lemneven- 
tuluj' (wind tree), in the vicinity of Remecz and Csucsa, 'Scumpie.' [Guylas 
notes that this was also cited by Baumgarten, Enum. Stirp. Transsilv. 1. 16, 1816. 
In Guylas' Hungarian text Baumgarten's name is spelt Szkum pine and in his 
German text Skum pine.] These last two names were given to S. Josikaea for the 
healing power of her bark, leaves and young shoots. The meaning of 'Scumpie' 
is connected with the high cost of the medicine which is made from the plant. . . . 
The Rumanian people use the dried young shoots as a medicine for people as well 
as for animals, especially for stomach ache and paralysis. A person suffering from 
stomach ache drinks the juice boiled out of the leaves of the Syringa and one 
suffering from paralysis rubs the warm juice upon the sick limb. The effective 
substance of the plant is Syringin (C17H24O2) which Kromayer first discovered 
and which is present in fairly large quantities in the bark and also in the 
mesophyll of the leaves." Guylas tells of his own experiments in extracting 
Syringin. 

S. Josikaea has been called by many common names. In French we find it as 
Lilas de Pensylvanie (Oudin, Cat. 1841, 22), Lilas feuilles de chionante (A. 
Leroy, Cat. 1852, 59), but the names most frequently applied are Lilas de Josika, 
Lilas Josika, and Lilas de Hongrie; in German Willkomm (Forstl. Fl. Deutschl., 
1. c.) cites Josika's Hollunder, but ordinarily Josika Flieder and ungarischer Flieder, 
both cited by Hartwig and Riimpler (Vilmorin's Blumengartn. , 1. c), are used; in 
English Deep Flowered German Lilac is cited in the "Botanical Magazine" (lx. 
t. 3278, 1833) and by Sweet (Hort. Brit. ed. 3, 1. c), Chionanthus-leaved Lilac is 
occasionally used (Prince, Cat. 1844-1845, 70), but Lady Josika's Lilac, Josika's 



54 THE LILAC 

Lilac and Hungarian Lilac, adopted as approved common name by "Standardized 
Plant Names," are those most frequently applied. 

Gerth van Wijk (Diet. PL Names, I. 1307, 191 1), in addition to certain of the 
names already mentioned, notes, as German names, lilak, syrene, syringsblume ; 
and, as Dutch names, hongaarsche sering and Josika sering. 

In England this species appears in Loddiges' Catalogue (1836, 66) as S. Josikaea. 

In early French catalogues we find it as follows: as S. Josikaea (Baumann, 
1838-1839, 8); as Lilas Josikea (Oudin, 1839-1849, 1; Dauvesse, no. 21, 19, 1856); 
as S. josikea, Lilas de Pensylvanie (Oudin, 1841, 22); as Lilas Josika (Seneclauze, 
1846-1847, 11); as 5. Josika, Josika Lilac (A. Leroy, 1850, 9); as 5. Josikaea, 
Chionanthus leaved Lilac (A. Leroy, 1851, 48); Baudriller (no. 43, 140, 1880) 
calls it S. Josikaea, Lilas a feuilles de chionanthe. 

In catalogues of the United States it appears: as S. Josikaea, Chionanthus- 
leaved Lilac (William R. Prince, 1844-1845, 66; Parsons, 1850, 25; Ellwanger 
and Barry, 185 5-1 856, 7); as S. Josikaea (Hovey, 1 846-1 847, n). It is found 
frequently listed at the present day. 

According to Pepin (Rev. Hort. 1844-1845, 120) the experiment of grafting 
S. Josikaea upon the ash was attempted: "Une greffe en 6cusson, faite en automne 
1842 du Syringa Josikaea sur le Fraxinus excelsior (Frene commun) a produit au 
printemps de 1844 un buisson d'une belle forme, par les nombreaux bourgeons qui 
se sont developpes sur la longueur de la tige." Pepin, so far as known, made no 
further reference to this experiment, and, judging from similar attempts made with 
the Common Lilac, it is doubtful whether it proved a success. 

While in Ottawa, Canada, in the spring of 1927, 1 had the opportunity to observe 
the trial hedges at the Dominion Experimental Farms. Among the handsomest of 
the tall hedges was one of S. Josikaea. In the "Rapport interimaire de l'Horti- 
culteur du Dominion" (year ending March 31, 1921, p. 38) is a note written by 
Dr. W. T. Macoun: "Lilas de Josika (Syringa Josikaea). — Beaucoup de gens 
aiment avoir une haie de lilas; e'est surtout une question de gout, car le lilas ordi- 
naire ne fait pas une haie satisfaisante; il n'est pas assez raide et il n'a pas une feuille 
assez attrayante pour une haie qui doit orner les abords toute la saison. Le feuillage 
se mildiouse assez souvent, ce qui lui enleve de sa beaute, et lorsqu'on taille la haie, 
il n'y a pas de fleur. Cependant le lilas de Josika fait une haie beaucoup plus belle 
que le lilas ordinaire. Les feuilles sont d'un vert fonce lustre" et l'arbuste est plus 
ferme que les autres. C'est Tune des grandes haies les plus belles que nous avons 
a, Ottawa." This hedge was planted in 1891 and is now about fifteen feet broad by 
eleven feet tall. It is the first which I have seen made of this species and, with 
Dr. Macoun, I agree that it is far handsomer than those made from the Common 
Lilac and should be more often used. 

Dr. W. T. Macoun (Report of the Dominion Horticulturist for the year 1922, 
p. 38) also mentions S. Josikaea among the best ornamental shrubs hardy at 
Ottawa, Canada, but states that it is "not so attractive as S. villosa." 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 55 

Franchet's monograph, "Observations sur les Syringa du nord de la Chine," 
is the source of the opinion that 5. Josikaea should be identified with S. emodi 
Wallich. He writes: "A propos de ces deux Syringa a feuilles discolores, je dois 
dire que j'ai vainement cherche un caractere precis permettant de distinguer nette- 
ment le S. Emodi, Wall., du S. Josikaea, Jacq. Ces deux Lilas ont toujours ete 
decrits comme s'ils ne pouvait etre confondus et, ni de Candolle, dans le Prodrome, 
ni Decaisne, dans sa Monographic, ne paraissent avoir songe a les comparer. On 
sait que le S. Josikaea n'est connu qu'en Hongrie, dans une seule localite des 
Siebenburgen, particularite de nature a jeter deja des doutes sur Pautonomie de 
l'espece. Ces doutes ne peuvent que s'accroitre lorsqu'on s'apercoit qu'on ne peut 
invoquer pour sa distinction specifique ni la forme des feuilles, qui se retrouve 
absolument la meme dans beaucoup des specimens de 1'Himalaya, c'est-a-dire 
variant de l'ovale a l'ovale-oblong, ni de la disposition generale de la grappe con- 
stitute par des rameaux courts et souvent ecartes, qui la rendent etroite et inter- 
rompue. Cette disposition s'observe dans plusieurs des echantillons rapportes 
du Cachemyr, par Jacquemont, notamment dans ceux qui portent le no. 445 
(Herb, du Museum de Paris). La couleur des fleurs n'est pas plus caracteristique; 
il est vrai qu'elles sont assez souvent blanches dans le S. Emodi; mais il n'est pas 
rare aussi de les voir avec la nuance ordinaire des Lilas; enfin, on retrouve dans 
les deux plantes cette meme pulverulence, dont aucun auteur n'a parle, sur la 
nervure principale, a la face interieure des feuilles." 

Franchet's comparison of the two plants is not convincing. As noted under 
S. emodi, although Brandis (Indian Trees, 445, 1906) refers to the color of its 
flowers as "white or purplish," Major J. E. T. Aitchison (Jour. Linn. Soc. Lon- 
don, xvm. 78, 1881) states: "The flowers are always pure or greenish white, never 
purple." The Hungarian botanists, Flatt (Erdesz. Lap. 1887, 568; A Syringa 
Josika-Firol, 1891) in particular, compared the two species and offered excellent 
reasons for considering them to be distinct. 

As cultivated plants, growing in the Arnold Arboretum, S. Josikaea and S. 
emodi appear quite distinct. The conspicuous lenticels and the long, pale, vertical 
fissures seen on the bark of the Himalayan Lilac are lacking upon the Hungarian 
plant. The former is a coarser grower with larger foliage. The flowers of the two 
species are distinct although both species belong to the same group of Lilacs and pro- 
duce their clusters upon leafy shoots, normally from terminal buds. The corolla- 
tube of S. emodi is cylindric and that of S. Josikaea funnelform; the corolla-lobes 
of the former are narrow and curl backward after they have been expanded for only 
a short time while those of the latter, broad at their base, are held erect. The 
anthers of S. emodi extend beyond the mouth of the corolla-tube while those of 
S. Josikaea are inserted just above the middle of the corolla-tube and are not 
visible. The fruit capsules of S. emodi are characterized by a conspicuous slender 
tip while those of S. Josikaea terminate abruptly in a very short one. 

Reichenbach at once noted that 5. Josikaea and S. villosa Vahl were probably 



58 THE LILAC 

The "Revue Horticole" (1908, 6) incorrectly attributes this form to the firm of V. 
Lemoine et fils, as does "Gardening Illustrated" for 1907. D. Bois (Rev. Hort., 1. c.) 
states that he wrote to Froebel on October 27, 1904, in regard to both the origin and the 
history of Eximia and H. Zabel; he tells us that they first appeared in Froebel's catalogue 
for 1900-1901 (no. 127, pp. 5 and 6); they are to be found even earlier however, in his 
catalogue for 1899 (no. 124, 78). 

Both have been classified at various times as 5. Henryi hybrids. Bois quotes 
Froebel's own statement in regard to this: "Ces deux nouveautes de Syringa 
Josikaea ont ete obtenues par des selections repetees et non par hybridation." Bois 
continues: "Ce dernier point n'etait pas inutile a fixer; car dans les catalogues des 
specialistes meme les plus qualifies, on trouve ces Lilas annonces comme 'hybrides du 
Syringa Bretschneideri' [= S. villosa]. C'est une indication erronee qui devrait etre 
remplacee par celle-ci: 'Selections du Syringa Josikaea.' Les seules hybrides issus 
du croisement du Syringa Bretschneideri et Josikaea, signales jusqu'ici, sont ceux qu'a 
obtenus au Museum notre collaborateur M. L. Henry. ..." 

It was of course possible that Froebel's plant of S. Josikaea might, unknown to him, 
have been naturally pollinized by 5. villosa, the second parent in the S. Henryi hybrids. 
Lobner (Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges., 1. c.) while retaining the name S. Josikaea 
eximia, states that, as a chance seedling, Eximia is obviously a hybrid of S. Josikaea and 
S. Bretschneideri [= S. villosa], which, in its growth and leaves, resembles more 
nearly S. Josikaea; he states that in the Froebel nursery were flowering specimens of 
5. Bretschneideri and that these obviously furnished the pollen for the cross-fertilization 
since they stood beside bushes of S. Josikaea, the species which was used as Froebel's 
seed parent. 

The illustrations of the flowers of this form, resembling closely those of the form H. 
Zabel which I have seen, indicate clearly that Froebel's statement as to its origin is the 
correct one, and I believe both Eximia and H. Zabel to be improved forms of the 
Hungarian Lilac, showing no trace of hybrid origin. The characters which differen- 
tiate the French hybrids have been discussed at length under 5. Henryi. In both 
Froebel Lilacs are found the small anthers which characterize S. Josikaea; and their 
insertion in the corolla-tube is at the same point, just above the middle. The same wide 
throat is present and the corolla-lobes are held erect. That these forms are noticeably 
superior to S. Josikaea is evidenced by the much larger individual flowers with propor- 
tionally broader throat and larger corolla-lobes, and by the fuller, larger, and handsomer 
clusters. The pedicels appear to be unusually long on the improved forms. There is 
little doubt, however, that plants of 5. Henryi have been sold under the names Eximia 
and H. Zabel. 

St. Olbrich states that Eximia was the result of work which he carried on in the field 
when director of the Froebel nurseries. 

Lingelsheim (Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 94, 1920) mentions among plants of 
hybrid origin cited by Beissner, Schelle and Zabel (Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415, 1903) S. 
Bretschneideri X Josikaea (S. eximia) var. Lutece Simon-Louis. This is not correctly 
quoted since these authors merely cite as synonym for their 5. villosa X Josikaea, S. 
Bretschneideri X Josikaea var. Lutece and do not mention S. eximia except as S. Josikaea 
eximia Hort. 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 59 

"Standardized Plant Names" has adopted Red Rose as approved common name. 

A plant (no. 17,350 Am. Arb.) bearing the name S. Josikaea eximia was received in 
191 1 at the Arnold Arboretum from Simon-Louis freres; it is merely a form of the hybrid 
S. Henryi. 

H. Zabel Froebel, Cat. no. 124, 79 (1899), as S. Josikaea "H. Zabel." — St. Olbrich 
in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xvi. 561 (1901). — Bois in Rev. Hort. 1908, 176. — 
Schneider, 111. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 782 (191 1); in Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laub- 
geh. 361 (1913). 

Syringa Josikaea Zabeli Hort. according to Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz- 
Ben. 415 (1903). — Lobner in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 16, 262 (1907). — 
Schelle in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 24, 208 (191 5). — Stipp in Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges. no. 37, 146 (1926). — Rehder, Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 752 
(1927). — G. Hegi, 111. Fl. Mittel-Eur. v. pt. in., 1909 (1927). 

Syringa Bretschneideri hybrida H. Zabel Lemoine, Cat. no. 155, 29 (1903). 

Syringa Henryi "H. Zabel" Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vr. 3300 (1917). 

Without a name, as " Syringa Josikaea Neuheit II.," this plant was first described 
by St. Olbrich (Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 7, 99, 1898) as one of Froebel's produc- 
tions. 

In introducing this form the next year Otto Froebel, of Zurich, describes it as follows: 
"Neuheit, die Rispe ist in Grosse und Form der S. Josikaea bedeutend iiberlegen, ebenso 
die einzelnen Bliiten, deren Petalen auch schon abgerundet sind. Die Farbe ist in Knos- 
penzustande hellrotviolett und im aufgebluhten Zustande lilarot." 

This plant originated in the Froebel nursery and was put on the market with the form 
Eximia; it has, in my opinion, been, like the latter, misclassified as a form of the hybrid 
S. Henryi. The reasons for considering H. Zabel to be an improved form of S. Josikaea, 
rather than a hybrid, have been given under Eximia. 

No illustration of H. Zabel has been found. 

This form is mentioned in "Standardized Plant Names" (486, 1923) without indica- 
tion of its species. The paragraph prefacing the list in which it appears is misleading and 
would indicate that it was a form of S. vulgaris. 

There is in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum a specimen (no. 42) of flowers and 
foliage which was collected by H. Zabel at Gotha; this was purchased with the Zabel 
herbarium; also a specimen (no. 1 166 Horsey) collected by R. E. Horsey from a plant in the 
collection of the Department of Parks, Rochester, New York. There are also examples 
of flowers collected in 1913 and 1914 from a plant (no. 6839 Am. Arb.) which is growing in 
the Arnold Arboretum and was received from H,. A. Hesse, Weener, Germany, in April, 
1910. The flowers of this plant bear such a marked resemblance both in color and in 
form of individual flower and of inflorescence to those of the plant (no. 15,660 Am. Arb.) 
grown from seed (no. 40) collected by Komarov, that I must believe them to be iden- 
tical. This Komarov (?) plant was until recently considered to be S. Wolfi. The 
only difference between the two plants (Am. Arb. nos. 6839 and 15,660) exists in the 
foliage which in the former (no. 6839) is more lustrous above. See 5. Wolfi. 

Notes taken from the living plant (no. 6839 Am. Arb.) show the color of the flowers 
to be as follows: in bud Light Perilla Purple to Argyle Purple to Purplish Lilac (xxxvn.) ; 



60 THE LILAC 

when expanded without and within Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.). The corolla-tube is some- 
times tinged Saccardo's Violet (xxxvu.). 

Monstrosa Jager, Ziergeholze, 529 (1865), name only, as 5. Josikaea var. 
monstrosa. 

This form of the Hungarian Lilac has been found mentioned in literature only once 
and without description. 

In the manuscript catalogue of the plants in the garden of the Forest Academy, 
Muenden, Hanover, which was purchased by the Arnold Arboretum with the H. Zabel 
herbarium, an entry records that Syringa Josikaea monstrosa was received in 187 1 from 
the Forest Garden, Chorin, Brandenburg, Prussia; Zabel had added "= vulgaris alba." 
Whether all plants of this name may have represented a white form of the Common Lilac 
seems doubtful; Zabel's original may have been grafted upon such a stock. 

Pallida Jager, Ziergeholze, 529 (1865), name only, as S. Josikaea var. pallida. — 
Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 140 (1880). — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 77 (1885). — Dippel 
Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 115 (1889). — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 378 (1892). — L. Henry in 
Jardin, ix. 32 (1895); in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 11. 751 (1901). — Voss, Vilmorin's 
Blumengartn. 654 (1896). — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 207 (1899); 
in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3301 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 752 
(1927). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415 (1903). — Sargent in 
Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. in. 42 (1917). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 
487 (1923), as a synonym. — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 27 (1926), reprinted from 
Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

Although at one time in quite general cultivation only meager descriptions of this 
form have been found, — it was probably merely a color variation, — and nothing in 
regard to its origin. 

Baudriller's catalogue mentions it, with S. Josikaea and the form which it calls "flore 
rubro" : " Ces trois dernieres varietes sont tres-ornementales par leur feuillage et par leurs 
fleurs tres-laches, paraissant seulement en juin"; he adds the common name of Lilas a. 
feuilles de chionanthe pales. Hartwig calls it the "blasser Josika-Flieder." L. Henry 
mentions it as appearing in horticultural catalogues and producing flowers "lilace bleu- 
atre, d'un mediocre effet." Rehder gives the color as "pale violet." 

"Standardized Plant Names" has adopted Pale Hungarian as approved common 
name. 

Professor C. S. Sargent (Bull. Arn. Arb., 1. c.) writes: "Two plants now found in some 
nurseries under the names of S. Josikaea pallida and S. Josikaea rosea are only forms of 
S. villosa with slightly different colored flowers. Plants under these names were culti- 
vated, however, in Europe several years before the discovery of S. villosa, and if they or 
other varieties of 5. Josikaea are known to any of the readers of these Bulletins the Arbore- 
tum will be glad to hear from them." As noted in the bibliography of this form the first 
reference found is that of 1865. S. villosa was described in 1805; it was only intro- 
duced between 1879 and 1881. A form of the Common Lilac, Pallida, was mentioned by 
Noisette as early as 1826. In 1879 the nurseryman Baumann (Cat. no. 159, 38) lists a 
Syringa pallida without specific name. His plant may either have been the 5". vulgaris 
form or this form of S. Josikaea. 



SYRINGA JOSIKAEA 61 

A plant (no. 6855 Am. Arb.) bearing the name 5*. Josikaea pallida was received at the 
Arnold Arboretum in 191 2 from Simon-Louis freres; it is merely a pale form of 5. Henryi, 

Rosea Niemetz in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 17, 191 (1908), name only, as 5". 
Josikaea rosea. — Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. 111. 42 (191 7). 

Niemetz, when writing of 5. velutina Komarov, — a plant which he says was intro- 
duced by Simon-Louis freres, and which he had undoubtedly confused with 5. velutina 
Bureau and Franchet [= 5\ tomentella Bureau and Franchet], — merely notes its similarity 
to S. Emodi rosea [= S. villosa] and to 6 1 . Josikaea rosea. 

As quoted under the form Pallida Professor Sargent mentions these two plants as 
found in some nurseries but as being merely "forms of 5. villosa with slightly different 
colored flowers." He states that plants under these names were cultivated, however, 
in Europe "several years before the discovery of S. villosa" and asks his readers for infor- 
mation in regard to them. As noted under Pallida that form has first been found men- 
tioned in 1865; Vahl described S. villosa in 1805 but the species was not introduced until 
between 1879 and 1882. 

I have found only these two references to this form, but a plant (no. 5216 Am. Arb.) 
bearing the name was received in 1902 at the Arnold Arboretum from Ellwanger and 
Barry, Rochester, New York. It is still growing in the collection but is merely a form 
of the hybrid S. Henryi. 

Possibly the forms Rosea and Pallida were identical. I have never seen plants of 
either which were other than pale forms of 5. Henryi. 

Rubra Hort. according to Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 77 (1885), name only. — 
Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk, 1. 115 (1889). — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 379 (1892). — Voss, 
Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 654 (1896). — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 
207 (1899); in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3300 (191 7); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 
752 (1927). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415 (1903). — Olmsted, 
Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 487 (1923), as a synonym. 

Syringa Josikaea flore rubro Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 140 (1880). — Mouillefert, Traite 
Arb. Arbris. 11. 1001 (1892-1898). — L. Henry in Jardin, ix. 32 (1895); in Jour. 
Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 11. 751 (1901). 

Syr[inga) Jos[ikaea]flor[ibus] rubris Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 115 (1889), as a synonym . 

This form was presumably merely a color variation from the type S. Josikaea. Its 
origin is not known. 

Neither the Zoschen catalogue nor Hartwig give a description, but the latter adds the 
common name " roter J[osika]-Fl[ieder]." Voss refers to it as " mehr rotviolett " than the 
form Pallida. Rehder notes the color as "reddish violet" and Baudriller gives it the 
common name of Lilas a. feuilles de chionanthe a, fleurs rougeatres; Mouillefert notes: 
"Fleurs plus rouges que dans le type, inflorescences aussi bien developpees et plus four- 
nies." L. Henry describes it as " Distinct par le coloris de ses fleurs plus rouges que celles 
du type; les inflorescences sont aussi plus grandes et plus fournies; c'est une variete 
veritablement meritante." 

The manuscript catalogue of the plants in the garden of the Forest Academy at 
Muenden, Hanover, which was purchased by the Arnold Arboretum with the H. Zabel 



62 THE LILAC 

herbarium records that Syringa Josikaeafl. rubro was received from the Transon nurseries 
in November, 1888. 

Ellwanger and Barry (Cat. 1896, n, Suppl.) offered it for sale as "Similar to the old 
variety except that the flowers are a deep shade of red." 

"Standardized Plant Names" has adopted Red Hungarian as approved common 
name. 

A specimen (no. 1165 Horsey) of what appears to be this form is in the herbarium of 
the Arnold Arboretum. It was collected on June 12, 1920, by R. E. Horsey, from a plant 
growing at Highland Park, Rochester, New York. Horsey notes: "Lilac with a tinge 
of red, fading light lilac." 



Plate XVI 







I 



% 



SYRINGA WOLFI 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 10,054) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1025. 



Plate XVII 





SYRINGA WOLFI 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 10,954) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. April 30, 1926. 



Plate XVIII 




SYRINGA WOLFI 
(Garden of Mr. John S. Ames, North Easton, Mass. 

Flower cluster. June 12, 1024. 



Plate XIX 




SYRINGA WOLFI 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 10,954) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked October, 1926. 



Plate XX 




l-O 



rf § n" 

d - 

O I- « 

S5 S Q 



« 



< 



'o 

d 

<! 



pq 



tf# 



SYRINGA WOLFI 

Syringa Wolfi Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. rx. 81 (1910); HI. Handb. Laub- 
holzk. 11. 782, figs. 489 i-k, 490 e-h, o-r (1911); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20,230 
(1911); no. 29, 162 (1920); in Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913). — 
Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 173 (1916). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. 
Hort. vi. 3302 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 752 (1927). — Lingelsheim in 
Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 79 (1920). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. 
Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 405 (1922). — Dunbar in Florists Exch. September 22, 1923, 
830. — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923). — Gartenwelt, 
xxvm. 278 (1924). — Stipp in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. XL. 399 (1925). — Stares, 
Cerines (Syringa L.), 4, 27 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

Syringa villosa Komarov in Act. Hort. Petrop. xxv. 253 (Fl. Mansh. 111.) (1907), in part. 

Not Vahl. 
Syringa villosa var. hirsuta Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. rx. 81 (1910); 111. Handb. 

Laubholzk. 11. 780 (191 1). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 80 

(1920). — Stares, Cerines {Syringa L.), 25 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. 

(1926). 
Syringa formosissima Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxi. 105 (1917); Rep. Veg. Diamond 

Mts., Corea, 182, t. in. fig. a (1917); Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 55, fig. and t. xxrv. (1921). — 

Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. n.s. vin. 23 (1922); rx. 20 (1923). — A. 0[sborn] in 

Garden, lxxxvh. 302 (1923). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PL Names, 

485 (1923). 
Syringa hirsuta Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxn. 132 (1918). 
Syringa hirsuta vox. formosissima Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxn. 133 (1918). 
Syringa formosissima var. hirsuta Nakai, Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 56, t. xxv. (1921). — Olmsted, 

Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PL Names, 485 (1923). 
Syringa robusta Nakai, Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 57 (1921). 
Syringa robusta f. subhirsuta Nakai, FL Sylv. Kor. x. 58 (1921), excluding synonym 

5. villosa var. typica f. subhirsuta Schneider. 
Syringa robusta f. glabra Nakai, FL Sylv. Kor. x. 58 (1921). 

An erect shrub up to 18 ft. tall; branches stout, gray, smooth, or sparingly lenti- 
cellate; branchlets gray-green, glabrous, sometimes pubescent, sparingly lenticellate; 
when young frequently tinged Burnt Umber (xxviii.). Winter-buds ovoid with acute 
apex, flower bud }/& in. long more or less, reddish brown with occasionally dark brown 
margins, scales acuminate, the four lower with sometimes an extremely long, slender tip, 
short-bearded pubescent especially along margins, keeled and forming a four-sided bud. 
Leaf-scar much raised, shield-shaped, conspicuous, medium size; bundle- trace slightly 
curved. Leaves elliptic-oblong, sometimes elliptic-lanceolate, 3-7 in. long, 3^~4 in- 
broad, acute, short-acuminate or acuminate, base cuneate or broad-cuneate, dark green, 
glabrous, or sparingly pubescent above, paler, glabrous, sparingly pubescent or pilose 

63 



64 THE LILAC 

especially along the midrib and primary veins beneath, sometimes ciliolate, when young 
frequently tinged Burnt Umber (xxvm.), midrib and primary veins conspicuous; petiole 
3^-i in. long, stout, glabrous, pubescent or pilose. Inflorescence terminal, borne on long 
leafy shoots, upright, panicle 4-10 in. long, 2-7 in. broad, broad at base, tapering to a 
narrow tip, interrupted, lateral branchlets near base long, frequently drooping for half 
their length, near apex short, with flowers sometimes fascicled; rhachis glabrous, pubes- 
cent or often pilose, sometimes tinged Burnt Umber (xxvin.); pedicel Vie in. long or 
less, glabrous, pubescent or often pilose, sometimes tinged Burnt Umber (xxviii.); calyx 
glabrous, pubescent or often pilose, truncate, undulate, or with short, rounded or acute 
teeth, sometimes tinged Burnt Umber (xxviii.) ; corolla-tube funnelform, % in. long 
or slightly less; corolla-lobes erect, never expanding to a right angle with corolla-tube, 
cucullate, with a pronounced hook; corolla YrY^ in. in diameter, color in bud Perilla 
Purple to Light Perilla Purple (xxxvu.) ; when expanded Light Perilla Purple (xxxvn.) 
without, Ivory Yellow (xxx.) or white within; anthers Primrose Yellow (xxx.), 
Vie in. long, inserted slightly below mouth of corolla-tube. Capsule oblong, smooth, 3^- 
5 js in. long, obtuse or each valve terminating occasionally in a short tip. (The notes on the 
color of the flowers were taken from a plant (no. 10,954 Am. Arb.; Wilson no. 9057) 
growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 

Habitat: Korea; Manchuria. 

C. K. Schneider, in first describing S. Wolfi in 1910, cites no specimens but tells 
us that in June he saw this Lilac in bloom in the garden of the Forestry Institute 
at St. Petersburg and named it for the director Egbert Wolf. Since at this time 
Schneider described the fruit, as well as the flowers, it is probable that he had seen 
herbarium material. In his "Handbuch," in 191 1, he mentions having received 
it from Wolf under the number 1059. Schneider believed that it grew in China 
although unknown there in a wild state. He thought the flowers as decorative as 
those of S. villosa Vahl and the two plants closely related. Again (Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges., 1. c), he refers to it as entirely hardy and free-flowering. 

It is probable that the first collector of S. Wolfi was V. L. Komarov who traveled 
extensively in Manchuria and in Korea, and whose botanical collections were sent 
to the Imperial Botanic Garden at St. Petersburg. The plant which Komarov 
describes as 5. villosa in his "Flora Manshuriae" appears to be, in part at least, 
5. Wolfi, for 5. villosa is not known to grow wild in Korea, and, as already noted 
by Schneider, the two are closely related. 

In November, 1906, a plant was received at the Arnold Arboretum from Regel 
and Kesselring, St. Petersburg, without a name but bearing the notation "Syringa 
no. 40 Komarov, Manchuria." The identity of this particular plant (no. 15,660 
Arn. Arb.; no. 40 Komarov) has been a matter of some question and it was until 
recently identified with S. Wolfi. Professor Sargent has frequently written in the 
"Bulletin of the Arnold Arboretum" in regard to the beauty of this plant, and has 
recorded the introduction of S. Wolfi to this country in 1906. I believe, however, 
that he was writing, not of S. Wolfi, but of an improved form of 5. Josikaea. 



SYRINGA WOLFI 65 

Schneider's description of S. Wolfi might easily be misapplied to S. Josikaea or to 
one of its improved forms and a confusion of labels was not impossible. See the 
form of S. Josikaea, H. Zabel. 

In August, 191 7, seed (no. 9057) which had been gathered by Mr. E. H. Wilson 
in Korea was received at the Arnold Arboretum under the name S. formosissima 
var. hirsuta Nakai. A plant (no. 10,954 Arn. Arb.) raised from this seed having 
flowered and fruited, the species was identified in 1927 by Mr. Rehder (Man. 
Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 1. c.) as the true S. Wolfi. 

S. Wolfi was described by Schneider as a tall shrub, in habit like S. villosa; the 
branches of the previous year [this is presumably an error on Schneider's part] 
glabrous, rounded, olive-colored; the branches of the year [Schneider confused the 
words annotinus and hornotinus, reversing their meanings] ash-colored, with many 
small lenticels; leaves elliptic, with margins somewhat parallel, bright green, 
glabrous above, pale, scarcely pilose along the veins or glabrous beneath; 11 X 4 
to 14 X 6-7 cm. large; base more or less acute, petioles 10 to 15 mm. long; in- 
florescence very large, to 28 X 14 cm. large; scarcely minutely pilose; flowers 
lilac, fragrant, with erect corolla-lobes, never flattening out, including the lobes 
18 to 20 mm. long; pedicels shorter than the calyx which is truncate at the margin, 
or almost twice as long; fruit obtuse, about 14 mm. long, non-verrucose. 

It is probable that Komarov had seen plants of S. Wolfi in Korea but considered 
them to be S. villosa; Schneider also, but had mistaken them for a pubescent form 
which he called S. villosa var. hirsuta. This variety he described in "Fedde" 
(1. c.) in 1910 as having leaves partly pilose between the veins beneath, with in- 
florescence, pedicel and calyx distinctly hirsute, with calyx truncate or scarcely 
denticulate. The plant's habitat is noted as Manchuria or northern Korea ; Lingels- 
heim also cites Schneider's plant as S. villosa var. 7 hirsuta and mentions a specimen, 
— Komarov no. 1258, — which he had seen. Curiously, this number, 1258, is the 
same under which Komarov classifies in "Flora Manshuriae" his S. villosa, already 
noted. I find nothing in Schneider's description to differentiate this variety hirsuta 
from the S. Wolfi described by Schneider and the locality whence the plant came 
also indicates that he was writing of the Korean Lilac found by Komarov. 

In 1 91 7 Dr. Nakai described his S. formosissima, with habitat in central and 
northern Korea, from six specimens (nos. 2205, 2208, 2198, 2195, 5754, 5753) 
which he had himself collected. He states that it is related to S. Josikaea but 
differs in the odorless flowers and in the fruit, obtuse or obtusish at the apex, and 
notes that it is an umbrageous plant growing in fertile soil. In all important 
details Nakai's description corresponds to Schneider's original one of 5. Wolfi; 
for he mentions the lenticellate character of the bark, the fact that the leaves are 
bright green above and paler beneath, the minutely pilose inflorescence, the erect 
corolla-lobes and the obtuse and non-verrucose fruit. His flowers are darker in 
color than those of Schneider's description, and the leaves slightly more pubescent 
above. Nakai's reference to a five-lobed corolla is undoubtedly an error, for, 



66 THE LILAC 

although an additional lobe is frequently produced, no Lilac is known having uni- 
formly five corolla-lobes. 

In 1918 Dr. Nakai describes still another species, S. hirsuta, from northern 
Korea; for this he cites, at least in part, the synonyms "S. villosa (non Vahl) Kom. 
Fl. Mansh. in. p. 253 saltern pro parte" and the S. villosa var. hirsuta of Schneider. 
He cites two specimens (no. 2197 Nakai and no. 195 Furumi). Nakai names 
5. hirsuta var. formosissima as a variety and gives as a synonym the S . formosissima 
which he had described in 191 7. 

In 192 1 Nakai returns in a measure to the classification which he had adopted 
in 191 7 and describes S. formosissima as a species, — this time with the synonym 
S. hirsuta var. formosissima Nakai, — and names as a variety S. formosissima var. 
hirsuta. When at the Arnold Arboretum in 1924 Dr. Nakai made a notation that 
this should have for a synonym .S. hirsuta Nakai, excluding synonyms [S. villosa 
(non Vahl) Komarov and S. villosa var. hirsuta Schneider]. 

In 192 1 he describes a new species 5. robusta, giving as synonyms S. villosa 
(non Vahl) Komarov and the 5. villosa var. hirsuta Schneider which in 1 918 he had 
given as synonyms of his 5. hirsuta; in addition he names two forms, — 5. robusta f. 
subhirsuta (for which he gives as a synonym S. villosa var. typica f. subhirsuta of 
Schneider) and 5. robusta f. glabra Nakai. 

It is evident from the involved synonymy that Nakai's three species, S. formosis- 
sima, S. hirsuta, and 5. robusta, with their varieties, whatever their characters, 
have not been clearly understood, nor have they stood out as noticeably distinct 
the one from the other. All inhabit Korea and come from its northern or central 
region or from both. 

I believe that the species S. Wolfi, in which I include S. formosissima, has pro- 
duced, as is the case with many Lilacs, not only a glabrous and a pubescent form, 
but also numerous examples, intermediate in amount of pubescence between the two 
extremes. All these I include in the typical form. 

While none of the examples of 5. Wolfi known to me are entirely glabrous, 
according to the descriptions given by Nakai the more glabrous examples are 
represented by his S. formosissima, his 5. hirsuta var. formosissima, his S. robusta 
f. subhirsuta and his S. robusta f. glabra. I do not agree with Dr. Nakai that the 
S. villosa var. typica I. subhirsuta Schneider, which he gives as synonym, first of 
his S. hirsuta and later of his 5. robusta f. subhirsuta, and which I have classified 
as a synonym of S. villosa, representing a somewhat more pubescent plant than 
typical S. villosa, should be classified as a synonym of any of the Korean plants. 
The Schneider plant came from the province of Chihli, China. Nakai notes of his 
S. robusta f. glabra, "planta tota glabra." He cites no specimens and I have seen 
no example which could be so described, but there is every reason to suppose that 
such exists as one of the extremes of this species. 

The more pubescent plants of 5. Wolfi are represented, as I understand them, 
by Dr. Nakai's S. hirsuta, his S. formosissima var. hirsuta and his S. robusta. 



SYRINGA WOLFI 67 

In first describing S. formosissima Nakai noted its resemblance to S. Josikaea, 
but stated that the Korean plant differed in its odorless flowers and in its fruit 
obtuse or obtusish at the apex. Of the marked resemblance of these two species 
there can be no doubt although 5. formosissima, here called S. Wolfi, is handsomer 
when in flower, handsomer even than the improved forms of the Hungarian Lilac 
such as Eximia and H. Zabel. The color of the flowers of both is much the same 
although those of S. Wolfi show less color within than do those of 5. Josikaea. 
Botanical differences exist in the size of the anthers which in S. Wolfi are larger; 
and in their insertion in the corolla-tube, in 5. Wolfi they are placed slightly nearer 
the mouth. Both have the same funnelform corolla-tube and the corolla-lobes, 
pronouncedly cucullate, are, in both, held erect, never expanding to a right 
angle with the corolla-tube. Studying the living flowers of S. Wolfi under a magni- 
fying glass it may be seen that, without, at the point where the margins of the 
corolla-lobes curl over, these are noticeably corrugated while the pronounced hook 
at the apex of the lobe is deeply incised. These characters are found also in S. 
Josikaea but to a lesser degree. They are less noticeable still in S. villosa and in 
the S. Henryi hybrids. The flower-clusters of both are similar in appearance, 
open and interrupted; the subdivisions of the inflorescence near the base are in 
both long — in S. Wolfi extremely so; they droop for half their length, and, becom- 
ing gradually shorter toward the top of the cluster, at, or near, the apex the flowers 
are often fascicled. The fruit of both is similar in form, non-verrucose, but in 
5. Wolfi it is as a rule blunt, while in S. Josikaea it is acute. The foliage of both is 
bright green above and paler beneath. Hirsute forms, such as are found in S. Wolfi, 
where the calyx, pedicel and rhachis are noticeably hairy, are not, so far as I know, 
found in the Hungarian Lilac. Despite their many resemblances a difference 
exists in the general apperance of these two species. A vast territory exists between 
their habitats and S. Wolfi may be regarded as the Asiatic representative of the 
European plant. Curiously, as is noted under S. Josikaea, certain botanists were 
of the opinion that S. Josikaea was merely naturalized, and not native in Europe, 
and suggested that it came from northern China. There is believed, at this time, 
to be no basis for such an opinion, however. See 5. Josikaea. 

S. Wolfi, although by some confused with S. villosa, does not bear so marked 
a resemblance to that Chinese species as to the Hungarian S. Josikaea. The 
flowers of S. Wolfi and of S. Josikaea contain much blue coloring matter, almost 
entirely lacking, so far as I have been able to find, in those of S. villosa, in which 
species they appear to be almost a clear pink, or whitish pink; the form of the corolla- 
tube in ,S. Wolfi is funnelform and in 5. villosa cylindric; the corolla-lobes of the 
former are held erect while those of the latter expand at a right angle to the corolla- 
tube and later curl backward slightly. Moreover, the inflorescence of S. villosa is, 
when the flowers are fully expanded, more compact than that of 5. Wolfi which is 
open and interrupted; nor do the lateral branches of the cluster show the tendency 
to droop which is apparent in both the Korean and Hungarian species. Since 



68 THE LILAC 

the influence of S. Josikaea is apparent in the S. Henryi hybrids (S. Josikaea X S. 
villosa), S. Wolfi more nearly resembles these than the species 5. villosa. 

In the Arnold Arboretum herbarium are cultivated specimens of 5. Wolfi 
(no. 1059) which came from Schneider's collection. They were gathered in the 
Pruhonitz Arboretum near Prague; the first, dated 191 2, is of flowers and foliage; 
the second, dated 1913, is of fruit. These bear the same number as that of the 
material — whether living plant, seed or herbarium specimens is not stated — which 
Schneider received from Egbert Wolf and which he mentions first in 191 1. There is 
still another specimen of undeveloped flowers from the Pruhonitz Arboretum but it 
bears no number. The foliage of these specimens is elliptic-lanceolate. The species 
is growing in the collection of the Department of Parks, Rochester, New York, 
and specimens from several of their plants are in the Arnold Arboretum herbarium; 
all are not numbered but no. 974 Horsey, 3 sheets, and no. 687 (raised from Regel 
and Kesselring no. 42) are clearly this species. 

Of spontaneous specimens collected by E. H. Wilson in Korea on his expedition 
of 1917-1918 made on behalf of the Arnold Arboretum there are the following: 
no. 8614, 4 sheets, one of fruit and three of flowers and foliage; these were collected on 
June 18, 191 7, at the French mine, Taiyudo, in the province of North Heian and 
determined as S . formosissima by the collector whose note states: "Straggling bush, 
6-18 ft., dark red flower, not fragrant, panicles erect, moist woods, common. . . 
830-1 000 m. " ; no . 868 7 , 2 sheets of flowers and foliage, collected June 22,1917, around 
O. C. M. Co. mines, Pukchin and Takkori, province of North Heian, "Abundant 
in moist forests . . . alt. 830-1000 m."; no. 8925, fruit and foliage, collected August 
16, 1917, from Shayurei to Mazan, province of North Kankyo, "Bush 6-12 ft., 
thickets, common"; this was determined by Mr. Wilson as 5. formosissina and by 
Dr. Nakai as his 5. robusta f. subhirsuta; no. 9057, of fruit and foliage, collected 
August 31, 191 7, on the Tumen-Yalu Divide in the province of North Kankyo; it 
bears the same note as the preceding and was determined as S. formosissima by 
Wilson and as 5. robusta f. subhirsuta by Nakai; no. 10,470, 2 sheets, of flowers and 
foliage, collected on July 6, 1918, at Kongo san, province of Kogen, "Flowers pale, 
woods, etc., alt. 1000-1667 m."; this was determined as S. formosissima by Wilson 
and as 5. villosa f. glabra [ = var. glabra] Schneider by Nakai; no. 10,488, flowers and 
foliage, collected July 6, 1918, at Kongo san, province of Kogen, "Flowers dark 
red, forests, not common . . . 1334 m."; this was determined by Wilson as S. 
formosissima. 

Mr. Wilson tells me that he considers all these, though variable in amount of 
pubescence, to be the same species; at the time his collections were made the species 
S. formosissima and S. Wolfi had not been united, but Mr. Wilson now considers 
them to be identical. 

The Arboretum herbarium also contains a spontaneous specimen of 5. Wolfi, 
of flowers and foliage, unnumbered, collected by Nakai on July 5, 1914, at Monte 
Atokryoeng, "Flores intense violaceo purpurei. Inflorescentia nutans." There 



SYRINGA WOLFI 69 

is also another received from the Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant 
Industry, Office of Foreign Seed and Plant Introduction, collected by P. A. Dorsett 
(no. 5989) on June 21, 1926, at Kaolingtzu, Manchuria, "Tall shrub with lavender 
flowers." This was determined by Mr. Rehder as S. villosa but the funnelform 
corolla-tube and the extremely pubescent rhachis, pedicel and calyx distinguish 
it from that species. 

In the Arboretum the two plants of 5. Wolfi raised from Mr. Wilson's seed are 
still small, only about four feet in height, but they appear to be open, spreading 
shrubs, and rapid growers. Even as young plants they have produced considerable 
bloom and fruit. The flower clusters are pyramidal, with a broad base and narrow 
top, and, as already noted, their lateral branchlets, near the base, droop in a con- 
spicuous fashion; the panicle is borne at the top of a long leafy shoot. On expanding 
in early spring the young shoots, foliage and inflorescences are tinged with a reddish 
brown color. The color of the flowers on the two plants varies slightly, one being 
darker than the other. They have a slight but not pleasing fragrance. The foliage 
expands early in the spring and falls early in the autumn and their protruding veins 
produce a slightly crinkled appearance in the leaf surface. So far they have proven 
entirely hardy. A plant of the same species, also raised from Mr. Wilson's seed, 
which is growing in the garden of Mr. John S. Ames, at North Easton, Massa- 
chusetts, shows only a slight variation in the color of its flowers from the Arboretum 
plants. It bloomed in 1924 and is, so far as I know, the first of this species raised 
from seed to flower in the United States. The two Arboretum plants show a 
marked difference in pubescence, one producing distinctly pilose, the other only 
slightly pubescent inflorescences. 

Dr. Nakai has cited numerous Japanese names for his species and varieties: for 
S. robusta, "Tachi-hashidoi" ; for 5. robusta f. subhirsuta, "Usuge-tachi-hashidoi"; 
for S. robusta f. glabra, "Hadaka-tachi-hashidoi" ; for S.formosissima and S. hirsuta 
var. formosissima, "Hana-hashidoi" ; for S.formosissima var. hirsuta and S. hirsuta y 
* i Ke-hana-hashidoi. ' ' 

Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in "Standardized Plant Names" (485, 1923) have 
retained as distinct 5. formosissima, S. formosissima hirsuta, and S. Wolfi. For 
the first two they give no approved common names; for S. Wolfi they adopt Wolf 
Lilac. According to my classification S. formosissima and its variety hirsuta should 
be united with S. Wolfi. 



Plate XXI 




SYRINGA REFLEXA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6857) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate XXII 




SYRINGA REFLEXA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6857) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. May 3, 1926. 



Plate XXIII 




in cr> 



w 
1-1 

u. 

w 
a 

< 

o 

1/3 



^ 
3 



~ O 






Plate XXIV 






t/J 


IN 




c/2 


H 








< 

X 




■* 


w 


c 


u 


kJ 


' ~* 


c 


ta 


•s 


^ 


w 




1 1 


Pi 






< 


1— 1 




o 


rt 




fe 


<u 


t/3 


►— ( 


H-) 


_3 




g 


U 

>- 


If} 


~c 




ffi 


o 



Plate XXV 




<N 

fj c-. 

<3 



a * 

W u 

to a 

W -^ 

Oh - 

W O 

o w 

CO g 



en 

)- 



o 



Plate XXVI 








vO 




^"^ 


ts 




en 


O 




t/3 


»-H 




Ctf 




< 




"f 


X 




M 


w 


aT 


U 


hJ 


c 


e 


fa 


* *"^ 


£3 


w 


_^ 


t— > 


s 


o 
o 




< 
o 

to 


Ih 


o 




_: 


q=! 


P 




C 


03 


£ 


• f—t 






*-> 




"o 


C 




K 


rt 




* — ' 


O. 



Plate XXVII 








o 






<N 






o 






M 






>-T 






<u 






Xi 






o 






-*-» 






o 






O 






T3 






<U 




en 

C/3 


-^ 




cd 


O 


< 


s 


£ 


X 






w 


oT 




J 


c 


<u 


to 


* ^j 


N 


W 


-^ 


't/2 


S 


o 
o 


13 




1— 


M 




ffl 


3 

-4— » 


ft 


cT 


c 


>— i 


<u 






1-1 




CO 


js 








1 

o 






Plate XXVIII 










00 


< 


vO 


X 

w 


6 






Pi 


-i_> 




0) 


<! 


t-i 

o 


o 


X3 


)— 1 


< 


3 


2 


Cfl 


"o 



l-l 






l-l 

<U 

H 

> 

o 



PQ 



SYRINGA REFLEXA 

Syringa reflexa Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. ix. 80 (1910); 111. Handb. Laub- 
holzk. 11. 779, figs. 488 a-d, i-m, 489 d-e (191 1); 11. 1063 (191 2); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. 
Ges. no. 20, 227, 229 (1911); no. 29, 162 (1920); in Sargent, PI. Wilson. 1. 297 (1912); in 
Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913); in Gartenschonheit, vm. 144, fig. 
(p. 143) (1927). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 19, April 25 (1912); n. s. 1. 31 (1915); 
iv. 25 (1918); v. 27 (1919); x. 43 (1924). — Hesse in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 21, 
196 (1912). — Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 173 (1916). — Wilson in 
Gard. Mag. xxiii. 154, fig. (1916); Aristocrats of the Garden, 221 (1917); ed. 2, 221 
(1926); America's Greatest Garden, 50 (1925). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. 
vi. 3300 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 753 (1927). — Skan in Bot. Mag. cxlvi. 
t. 8869 (1920). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 81 (1920). — Silva 
Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 404 (1922). — Olmsted, Coville 
and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923). — Dunbar in Florists Exch. September 22, 
1923, 799. — A. 0[sborn] in Garden, lxxxvii. 301 (1923). — Gartenwelt, xxviii. 278 
(1924). — Stipp in Gartenwelt, xxviii. 409, figs. 1, 2 (1924); in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.- 
Zeit. xl. 398, fig. in. (1925); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 37, 146, t. 20, 21 (1926). — 
Mottet, Arb. Arbust. Orn. 340 (1925). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 4, 22 (1926); 
reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

A broad-topped, spreading shrub up to 12 ft. tall; branches angular, thick, smooth, 
gray, lenticellate; branchlets glabrous, lenticellate. Winter-buds oblong with acuminate 
apex, flower bud Yi in. long more or less, scales reddish brown with dark brown margins, 
acuminate, keeled and forming a distinctly four-sided bud, the four lower scales with 
sometimes an extremely long, slender tip, glabrous. Leaf-scar much raised, almost semi- 
circular, conspicuous, large; bundle-trace only slightly curved. Leaves ovate-oblong to 
oblong-lanceolate, occasionally elliptic-obovate, 3-8 in. long, 1-2 in. broad, acuminate, 
base tapering or cuneate, dull green, glabrous or sometimes when young sparingly pubes- 
cent above, paler, sometimes tinged Vinaceous-Drab (xlv.), villous beneath especially 
along midrib and primary veins which are sometimes tinged Vinaceous-Drab (xlv.); 
midrib and primary veins conspicuous; petiole slender, Yr^A m - l° n g> tinged Vinaceous- 
Brown (xxxix.). Inflorescence borne on leafy shoots, terminal, occasionally lateral; 
panicle laxly pyramidal or cylindric, suberect, drooping, or pendulous, 5-12 in. long, 2-7 
in. broad; fascicles interrupted, occasionally remote; rhachis glabrous or sometimes 
villous, lenticellate; pedicel short, glabrous or sometimes villous; calyx short, glabrous 
or villous, with acute teeth; corolla-tube funnelform, 7 /i6in. long; corolla-lobes spread- 
ing at right angles to corolla-tube, pointed, cucullate; corolla 5 /i 6 in. in diameter, color 
in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Rhodonite Pink (xxxvin.); when expanded Rhodonite 
Pink (xxxvin.) without, Light Buff (xv.) or white within; anthers Primrose Yellow 
(xxx.), inserted at mouth of corolla- tube, occasionally protruding. Capsule oblong, 
erect or reflexed on the panicle, verrucose, H~% m - long, each valve often terminating in 

71 



72 THE LILAC 

a short, slender tip. (The notes on the color of the flowers were taken from a plant (no. 
6857 Arn. Arb.) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 

Habitat: China : province of Hupeh. 

C. K. Schneider in 1910 described the species Syringa reflexa from two specimens. 
The first (no. 6819), of fruit, was collected by Augustine Henry in the province of 
Hupeh in central China, at an altitude of 8000 to 9000 ft. S. A. Skan, in the 
"Botanical Magazine" of 1920, states that this specimen was gathered in 1889 at 
Fang [ = the district of Fang hsien in western Hupeh]. In the Gray Herbarium, 
Cambridge, Massachusetts, is a specimen of fruit bearing the same number (6819) 
but the date is noted as 1885-1888. This was at one time determined as S. emodi. 
The second (no. 2078 Veitch) of flowers, was found by E. H. Wilson while collecting 
for Messrs. James Veitch and Sons in 1901, in the mountains of Fang hsien; Mr. 
Wilson's field notes state that it was a bush 6-12 ft. tall, with light purple flowers. 
A co-type specimen, showing flowers and fruit of a previous year, is in the herbarium 
of the Arnold Arboretum. 

Schneider's description, translated, reads: "A shrub related to S. villosa; branches 
of the previous year [presumably an error on Schneider's part] glabrous, olive 
colored, branches of the year [Schneider confused the words annotinus and horno- 
tinus, reversing their meanings] more or less ash-colored, round, dotted with many 
lenticels; leaves elliptic-oblong or oboval or lanceolate, to 7 X 3-5 - i3 X 5.5 or 
11 X 3.5 or 11 X 5.5 mm. large, above deep green, especially on the midrib pilose, 
beneath pale, toward base bearded-pilose, on margins scabrous; petiole to 2 cm. 
long; inflorescence to 14 X 3 cm. large (fruiting up to 18 cm. long) ; flowers violet (?), 
at apex scarcely spreading, with tube about 11 mm. long; calyx about 3 mm. long, 
truncate-denticulate, scarcely pilose; pedicels 2-3 mm. long, pilose; fruit to 15 mm. 
long, verrucose, obtuse, reflexed." 

Wilson also collected S. reflexa on his later expeditions of 1 907-1 908 and 1910- 
191 1 made for the Arnold Arboretum. In June, 1907, he found it (no. 2582) 
again in Fang hsien growing in thickets at an altitude of 5000-8000 ft. and de- 
scribed the bush as 6-8 ft. tall with reddish flowers; on June 16, 1910, he again 
found it (no. 4460) growing in thickets, in the district of Fang hsien, at an altitude 
of 6000-8000 ft., and noted that the flowers were rosy pink, the panicle pendulous, 
and the shrub 5-12 ft. tall. A photograph (no. 092 Wilson), taken of this shrub in 
flower is in the collection of the Arnold Arboretum. A second specimen bearing the 
same number (no. 4460) was gathered when the plant was in fruit, in October, 1910. 

Seed (no. 4460) collected at this date was sent to the Arnold Arboretum where 
it was received in March, 191 1, and the species was thus introduced into cultivation 
in the United States and elsewhere. The Arnold Arboretum sent some of this 
shipment of seed to the Office of the Woods, Forests and Land Revenues, in Eng- 
land. It was from that Office that the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew received 
their first seed in 191 1, and from it was grown the plant figured in the "Botanical 
Magazine" of 1920. 



SYRINGA REFLEXA 73 

S. reflexa was offered for sale by the Lemoine firm in 191 7 (Cat, no. 191, 25). 
The flowers are described in the English edition as having "reflexed lobes of a soft 
mauve color." I have seen no flowers on plants of this species which were other 
than a decided pink. 

Wilson, in the second edition of his "Aristocrats of the Garden," states: "The 
most distinct of all Lilacs is the new 5. reflexa with narrow or broad flower clusters 
from nine to twelve inches long, suberect, nodding or pendent and sometimes 
hang[ing] downward like the inflorescence of the Wistaria. ... It is native of the 
margins of woods and thickets on the mountains of western Hupeh, in central 
China. . . ." Mr. Wilson tells me that his photograph, already mentioned, gives 
an excellent idea of the wild plant. 

Schneider in first describing this species distinguishes it from S. villosa by its 
warty, reflexed fruit; it was because of this character, rather than because of the 
pendulous flower-clusters, that the plant received its name. I have not found the 
fruit to be more reflexed upon the panicles than is that of other species such as S. 
Komarowi and S. Julianae. Lingelsheim writes: "S. reflexa forma fructus nullo 
modo a S. villosa distinguenda est, ut C. K. Schneider putat, fructus 'reflexi' etiam 
in paniculis S. villosae occurrunt." 

The plant of S. reflexa (no. 6857 Arn. Arb.) growing in the Arnold Arboretum 
which was raised from Wilson's seed (no. 4460) does not give a good idea of the 
beauty of this Lilac, for it has never thriven satisfactorily. Growing near by, 
at Holm Lea, Brookline, Massachusetts, are four plants which are worthier repre- 
sentatives of the species. These show the wide variation which is characteristic 
of S. reflexa, not only in color, but also in form of individual flower and of inflores- 
cence. In one of these plants the flower-clusters are narrow and the flowers notice- 
ably fascicled; in the other three they branch widely at the base; three have large 
flowers, while one has curiously small ones. In all the corolla-lobes are narrow, 
cucullate, and show a tendency to curl backward against the corolla-tube after they 
have been expanded for a time; and in all the somewhat large anthers, Primrose 
Yellow (xxx.), are inserted near the mouth of the corolla-tube and protrude 
slightly. The following color notes taken from these four plants will give an idea 
of the range of color found in this species. Plant no. 1 : color in bud Rhodonite 
Pink (xxxvin.) ; when expanded Rhodonite Pink to Pale Rhodonite Pink (xxxvin.) 
without, Pale Vinaceous-Fawn (xl.) within. Plant no. 2 : color in bud deep Helle- 
bore Red to Rocellin Purple to Rhodonite Pink (xxxvin.) ; when expanded Rhodo- 
nite Pink to Pale Rhodonite Pink (xxxvin.) without, Pale Purplish Vinaceous 
(xxxrx.) within. Plant no. 3: color in bud Rhodonite Pink (xxxvin.) to Olive- 
Buff (xl.) tinged with Pale Grayish Vinaceous (xxxrx.); when expanded corolla- 
tube Light Brownish Vinaceous tinged with Pale Purplish Vinaceous (xxxrx.), 
corolla-lobes white without, Pale Olive-Buff (xl.) to white within. Plant no. 4: 
color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Rocellin Purple to Rhodonite Pink (xxxvin.); 
when expanded Rhodonite Pink without, Pale Rhodonite Pink (xxxvin.) to Pale 



74 THE LILAC 

Purplish Vinaceous (xxxrx.) within. In all these plants the clusters are nodding 
or almost pendulous and they vary from rive to six inches to a considerably greater 
length. * 

The foliage of this species is large and handsome; it is somewhat rough to the 
touch, unfolds late in the spring and falls early in the autumn. The flowers open 
in late May or early June; unfortunately they lack fragrance; the individual 
blossom falls as it fades, leaving the calyx and a prominent pistil. The fruit is 
about z /i of an inch long, and as a rule pronouncedly warty or verrucose. This 
character and the smooth gray bark marked with dark lenticels, appear to dis- 
tinguish this species from the closely related 5. Komarowi, on living plants of which 
the fruit capsules are commonly smooth while the bark on old wood is marked with 
many small fissures giving an effect of network; bark of the same character is 
found on the species S. Julianae. When in bloom S. reflexa is a far handsomer 
plant than 5. Komarowi. See also 5. Komarowi. 

Mr. E. Lemoine wrote me, on July i, 1925, in regard to these species: "Je crois 
que les S. reflexa, Komarowii, Sargentiana, ne sont que des varietes d'une seule et 
meme espece. J'ai recu autrefois d'une pepiniere allemande le S. reflexa; et depuis 
j'ai eu des graines recoltees a 1' Arnold Arboretum. Ces graines m'ont donne des 
plantes tres variees, a. inflorescences paniculees, bien plus ramiiiees que dans ma 
premiere plante, et j'ai eu l'impression que les S. reflexa de l'Arboretum avaient 
du etre croises avec une autre espece par les abeilles." 

The common name of Pendulous Lilac has been given this species by Nash 
(Jour. N. Y. Bot. Gard. xx. 234, 1919). Nodding Lilac has been adopted as ap- 
proved common name by "Standardized Plant Names." 

E. H. Wilson in "Aristocrats of the Garden" suggests that in the hands of 
the hybridist S. reflexa "may be the forerunner of a race totally different in aspect 
from present day Lilacs." 

The attempt was made by Miss Isabella Preston (see the hybrid S. Prestoniae) 
to cross S. reflexa (§) and 5. Josikaea ($). Dr. W. T. Macoun in his "Report 
of the Dominion Horticulturist for the year 1925" writes under the heading "Some 
results in cross-breeding ornamental plants at the Central Experimental Farm, 
Ottawa, Canada": "S. reflexa X S. Josikaea is a handsome shrub with large 
panicles of lilac flowers." When in Ottawa in June, 1927, this cross was impossible 
to locate. There was in the collection a plant (no. 20-09) which in the form and 
color of its flowers suggested 5. Josikaea and in its pendulous inflorescence S. 
reflexa. The plant had a somewhat abnormal appearance and except for purposes 
of further hybridization had little to recommend it. A specimen is in the Arnold 
Arboretum herbarium. 

For Miss Isabella Preston's attempt to cross S. reflexa ( 9 ) with S. Henryi 
Lutece ( 6 ) see the hybrid S. Henryi. 

See 5. Prestoniae, a hybrid between S. reflexa ( 6 ) and S. villosa ( $ ). 

* Three of these plants in the autumn of 1927 were moved to the Arboretum collection where they bear the 
nos. 20,450, 20,451 and 20,452. 



Plate XXIX 




SYRINGA KOMAROWI 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6858) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate XXX 




SYRINGA KOMAROWI 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 6858) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. May 3, 1926. 



Plate XXXI 







o 

< 

o 



oc 

d 

c 

3 



o 

« 

1/1 



< 

O 

C 

< 



<N 



e 

3 



<u 



3 



o 



Plate XXXII 




00 
l-O 

S? oo 
8 g 

o 5 

I— I _- 1 
>H c 

< 



On 



=3 

bC 

< 

X) 

u 



b£ 



3 



Plate XXXIII 




00 
is-, 

tr 1 oo 

% c 

S S 

o 

M 

< 

o 

>H O 



<u 

o 



o 



J-l 



> 
o 



^4 

PS 



SYRINGA KOMAROWI 

Syringa Komarowi Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. ix. 82 (1910); 111. Handb. 
Laubholzk. 11. 738, figs. 489 b-c, 490 s-u (191 1); 11. 1064 (1912); in Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 227, 230 (1911); in Sargent, PI. Wilson. 1. 301 (1912). — Sargent in 
Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 19, April 25 (1912); n. s. rv. 26 (1918); ix. 43 (1924). — Goeze in 
Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 173 (1916). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. 
vi. 3302 (1917). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 79 (1920). — Silva 
Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 405 (1922). — A. Ofsborn] in 
Garden, lxxxvii. 301 (1923). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 485 
(1923). — Gartenwelt, xxviii. 278 (1924). — Mottet, Arb. Arbust. Orn. 340 (1925). — 
Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 4, 27 (1926); reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

Syringa Emodi Hemsley in Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxvi. 83 (Ind. Fl. Sin. 11.) (1889), 
in part, as to Faber specimen. — Diels in Bot. Jahrb. xxix. 532 (1901). — Not Wallich. 

Syringa Sargentiana Schneider in Sargent, PL Wilson. 1. 298 (191 2); 111. Handb. Laubholzk 
11. 1063, fig. 628 a (1912). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 19, April 25 (1912); 
n. s. v. 27 (1919); vni. 23 (1922). — Wilson, Naturalist in Western China, 1. 247 
(1913). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. i-u. 81 (1920). — A. 0[sborn] 
in Garden, lxxxvii. 302 (1923). — Gartenwelt, xxviii. 278 (1924). — Stares, 
Cerines {Syringa L.), 4, 23 (1926); reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

Syringa Komarowii var. Sargentiana Schneider in Sargent, PL Wilson, m. 432 (1917); 
in Gartenschonheit, vni. 144, t. (as 5. Sargentiana) (1927). — Rehder in Bailey, 
Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3302 (191 7); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 754 (1927). — 
Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. rv. 25 (1918). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, 
Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 405 (1922). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. 
PL Names, 485 (1923). 

A broad shrub from 6 to 15 ft. tall; branches upright, stout, lenticellate, marked with 
conspicuous ridges; branchlets smooth, occasionally slightly pubescent, quadrangular, 
brownish gray, lenticellate, tinged when young Dark Vinaceous-Brown (xxxix.). Winter- 
buds oblong with acuminate apex, flower bud Y2 in. long more or less, scales reddish brown 
with dark brown margins, acute or acuminate, glabrous, keeled, and forming a four-sided 
bud. Leaf-scar much raised, shield-shaped, very conspicuous, large; bundle-trace broad 
V-shaped. Leaves ovate-oblong to oblong-lanceolate, sometimes elliptic-obovate, 2-6 
in. long, J^-3 in. broad, acute or acuminate, base cuneate, dark dull green, glabrous 
above, paler, pubescent beneath, tinged when young Dark Vinaceous-Brown (xxxix.); 
Y2-1 in. long, slender, glabrous. Inflorescence borne on leafy shoots, terminal, nodding 
or pendulous, 2-6 in. long, 2 in. broad, cylindric, compact; rhachis pubescent at first, 
later glabrous, lenticellate; pedicel short, pubescent; calyx short, pubescent, sometimes 
glabrous, with shallow, rounded or acute teeth; corolla-tube funnelform, }4 : ~} / 2 m - l° n g; 
corolla-lobes upright or spreading at right angles to corolla-tube, frequently only three 

75 



76 THE LILAC 

in number, pointed, slightly cucullate; corolla x /i in. in diameter, color in bud Deep 
Hellebore Red (xxxviii.) tinged on corolla-lobes Vinaceous-Fawn (xl.) ; when expanded 
Rocellin Purple without, Daphne Red (xxxvin.), a solid color, within; anthers Primrose 
Yellow (xxx.), V% m - l° n g> inserted near the mouth of corolla-tube and protruding. 
Capsule oblong, frequently contracted near the apex, reflexed, smooth, or rarely slightly 
verrucose, % in. long, each valve ending in a short slender tip. (The notes on the color 
of the flowers were taken from a plant (no. 6858) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 

Habitat: China: province of Szechuan. 

When in 1910 C. K. Schneider described the Hupeh species S. reflexa he also 
described for the first time the nearly allied plant Syringa Komarowi, from the 
province of Szechuan, China. He based his description upon a flowering speci- 
men with Russian inscription, — in 191 1 he notes that the precise locality and name 
of the collector were unreadable, — which was in the herbarium of the Botanic 
Garden at St. Petersburg; it was collected in Szechuan on July 18, 1893. Schneider 
named the species for V. L. Komarov, the Russian botanist, the author of the 
"Flora Manshuriae." 

His description, translated, reads: "A shrub; habit?; flowering branches 
yellow-brown, round, loosely pilose, with many distinct lenticels; older branches 
gray-brown; leaves narrowly ovate, acute, above deep green, minutely pilose on 
veins, beneath yellow-green, everywhere pilose, but not bearded on midrib, 11-18 
cm. long, 4-7 cm. broad, with petiole to 15 mm. long; inflorescence narrow, to 
14 X 5 cm. large, like pedicel and calyx (partly) loosely short-hirsute; flowers 
violet (?), to 18 mm. long (with erect lobes hardly 2 mm. long included), calyx 
hardly 2 mm. long; anthers exceeding the mouth of corolla about % as in S. emodi; 
pedicel more or less lacking; fruit unknown." 

According to Bretschneider (Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 1020, 1898) G. 
A. Potanin, while collecting for the Imperial Russian Geographical Society, re- 
mained from June 22, 1893, for three months in Ta tsien lu. As the specimen 
upon which Schneider based his S. Komarowi was gathered on July 18, 1893, it 
seems probable that its collector was Potanin, for his material went to the Im- 
perial Botanic Garden at St. Petersburg. 

In 1 91 2 Schneider identified this species with three specimens collected by E. H. 
Wilson in western Szechuan on his expeditions made in 1907-1908, and in 1910-1911, 
for the Arnold Arboretum. The first of these (no. 1217), of which there are two 
examples, was gathered at Mupin; one of flowers in July, 1908, the other of fruit 
in October of the same year. The plant was 6-15 ft. tall, growing in thickets at 
an altitude of 6000-9000 ft. and the flowers are noted as "deep rose-pink." A 
second (no. 2580), of flowers, came from Nin tou shan west of Kuan hsien in western 
Szechuan and was dated June 20, 1908, the plant, 10-12 ft. tall, growing in thickets 
at an altitude of 7000-9000 ft.; the flowers were "reddish purple." A third (no. 
4407) of fruit, also from Mupin, was collected in October, 1910, from a bush 15 ft. 
tall growing in woodlands at an altitude of 9000 ft. When writing of these speci- 



SYRINGA KOMAROWI 77 

mens Schneider for the first time describes the fruit as " 12-14 mm. long, obtuse or 
sometimes mucronulate and nearly smooth." 

Under the name 5. Sargentiana, Schneider in 191 2 described, from further 
specimens collected by Wilson in western Szechuan, still another species. One 
(no. 2581) of flowers came from Wa shan, at an altitude of 6000-8000 ft.; the 
bush 10-12 ft. tall was growing in thickets, and bore "reddish purple" flowers; it 
was dated July, 1908. The second (no. 4304) from Pan Ian shan, west of Kuan 
hsien was growing in woodlands at an altitude of 8000 ft.; the bush was 10-12 
ft. tall; it was collected in October, 1910. Schneider writes: "This species seems 
nearly related to S. reflexa Schneider, but differs in the long acuminate leaves, the 
denser and usually shorter, only nodding, not pendulous inflorescence, the pubescent 
calyx and the not verrucose fruit." In 191 7 he reduces this to a variety of 5. 
Komarowi writing: "Judging by living plants, this species must be regarded as 
a variety only of S. Komarowii Schneider. The insertion of the anthers in the 
corolla- tube is about the same in both species; it is possible to find slight variations 
in different flowers, the apex of the stamens sometimes only reaching the mouth 
of the corolla, sometimes being more or less slightly exserted." He adds to his 
enumeration of specimens the plant (no. 4081 Veitch) collected by Wilson in July, 
1903, at Wa shan in western Szechuan; the collector's notation reads: "6-15 ft. 
Fls. rose. 7-8500 ft. Mt. Wa. 7103." This number (4081 Veitch) is not a Wilson 
seed number and although he first collected specimens in 1903 it was not until 19 10 
that he collected seed and introduced the Lilac to cultivation. 

Lingelsheim in 1920 retains S. Sargentiana as a species based upon the Wilson 
specimens (nos. 2581 and 4304), but notes that these he has not seen. 

Examination of the specimens determined by Schneider as S. Komarowii var. 
Sargentiana reveals no characters which appear to justify its retention as a variety 
and I have included it as a synonym of S. Komarowi. Schneider himself had noted 
that the "insertion of the anthers in the corolla-tube is about the same in both. . . ." 

The relationship of S. Komarowi to S. reflexa Schneider is exceedingly close and 
it is possible that at some future time S. Komarowi may be classified as an extreme 
form of the Hupeh plant. Observation of living plants shows the fruit of S. 
reflexa to be noticeably verrucose while that of S. Komarowi is practically smooth. 
This distinction is, however, less pronounced in some of the herbarium material. 
The bark on old wood of S. reflexa is smooth and gray in color, marked with dark 
lenticels, while that of 5. Komarowi is covered by a fine net-work of fissures, much 
like that found on the species S. Julianae. These two characters, noticeable on 
the living plants, appear to justify, for the time, the retention of these plants as 
distinct species. In S. Komarowi the flower-cluster appears to be more compact 
and cylindric than in S. reflexa, and the color of the flowers is considerably darker, 
but, as noted under S. reflexa, that species is extremely variable both in the form 
and color of its inflorescence, and one finds plants of that Lilac showing quite as 
wide a divergence in these respects as exists between S. reflexa and 5. Komarowi. 



78 THE LILAC 

Mr. Wilson who had unusual opportunities to observe these two species growing 
spontaneously at one time believed them to be distinct. In his book, "A Naturalist 
in western China" he wrote of the "red Basin of Szechuan," — to the west of which 
grows 5. Komarowi, and to the east, in Hupeh, S. refiexa, — that "this triangle has 
long constituted a well-marked boundary is evidenced by the fact that remarkably 
few of the plants found in the mountains bordering the eastern limits at 2000 feet 
altitude and upwards are common to the mountains bordering the western limits. 
The genera are of course the same but the species are usually distinct. The differ- 
ence between the floras of the eastern and western border-ranges is too great for 
a mere 500 miles of longitude to account for solely. The same is true of the fauna 
in so far as the game birds and animals is concerned." It is of course possible to 
believe that this difference in geographical situation may account for some of the 
differences in the two species. Mr. Wilson tells me recently that he considers it 
possible that S. Komarowi may eventually be considered to be an extreme form 
of S. refiexa, the combined range of the two plants extending along the Ta pa shan 
to Sungpan and south to Mt. Wa. 

Hemsley (Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxvi. 83, 1889-1902; Ind. Fl. Sin. 11.) 
refers under S. emodi Wallich to a specimen [no. 203] in the herbarium of the Royal 
Botanic Gardens, Kew, which was collected by [Ernst] Faber at Mt. Omei at an 
altitude of 10,000 feet. Mt. Omei is south of Ya chou in the western part of Szechuan. 
This specimen, which, through the courtesy of Dr. A. W. Hill, was forwarded for 
examination, I refer to S. Komarowi. Diels (Bot. Jahrb., 1. c.) cites for his S. emodi 
the [Augustine] He[nry] specimen no. 6819 collected on Mt. Omei. Henry did not 
collect within a great distance of Mt. Omei; it is possible that Diels received his 
specimen (probably the Faber plant just noted since Diels refers to the "Index 
Florae Sinensis," p. 83) from Dr. Henry and through an error attributed its collec- 
tion to the donor. 

The species is growing in the collection of the Department of Parks, Rochester, 
New York, and specimens from several of their plants are in the Arnold Arboretum 
herbarium; among them are three sheets (nos. 695, 699, one unnumbered) taken 
from plants grown from Wilson no. 4304 and four sheets (no. 682) from Wilson 
no 1 2 17. 

Seed (no. 4304) collected by Wilson at Pan Ian shan west of Kuan hsien, in 
October, 1910, and which, as already noted, was first described as S. Sargentiana, 
was received at the Arnold Arboretum in February, 1911. The plant (no. 6858 
Arn. Arb.) of S. Komarowi now growing in the collection was raised from this seed. 

The firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, offered S. Komarowi for sale 
as a novelty in 1913 (Cat. no. 185, 7, 1913). Their stock was raised from Wilson's 
seed (no. 1217), collected at Mupin in October, 1908. As noted under S. refiexa, 
Mr. Emile Lemoine now considers that "5. refiexa, Komarowii, Sargentiana, ne 
sont que des varietes d'une seule et meme espece." 

"Standardized Plant Names" has adopted as approved common names, — for 



SYRINGA KOMAROWI 79 

S. Komarowi, Komarof Lilac, for 5. Komarowi var. Sargentiana, Sargent Lilac; 
according to my classification the latter name should be dropped. 

In the Arnold Arboretum the plant of S. Komarowi has proven entirely hardy, 
but is, when in bloom, interesting rather than handsome, for the nodding flower- 
clusters are few and so compact in form that they lack grace. They open in late 
May or early June and have little fragrance. In color they are a deeper pink than 
those of any other Lilac known to the present time. The foliage is somewhat 
sparse and slightly rough to the touch. It is by no means as handsome when in 
flower as S. reflexa. 

Mr. F. L. Skinner of Dropmore, Manitoba, Canada, wrote me on November 
18, 1925: "Four years ago I secured some pollen of S. Sargenti [=S. Komarowi] 
from the Arnold Arboretum; this was used on a panicle of S. vulgaris and a number 
of seeds were secured. These germinated freely and I now have ten plants appar- 
ently from this cross. These seedlings have, to the naked eye, the foliage of 5. 
villosa, and though I took every precaution to exclude seeds [sic] of S. villosa I 
hesitate to claim this cross until my plants have flowered." In August, 1926, Mr. 
Skinner sent foliage specimens to Professor Sargent and wrote: ". . . None of 
them however show any of the characteristics of S. vulgaris, at least as far as I can 
tell with the naked eye. . . . None of them have flowered yet." The foliage, as 
noted by Mr. Skinner, shows no trace of 5. vulgaris parentage. 



Plate XXXIV 




SYRINGA VILLOSA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,362) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate XXXV 





SYRINGA VILLOSA 
Arnold Arboretum no. 17,362) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. May 3, 1926. 



Plate XXXYI 




SYRINGA VILLOSA 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 41 71) 

Flower cluster. June 12, 1924. 



Plate XXXYII 








^o 




,_, 


(N 




l^ 


o 




HH 


H-t 




Tt 


», 


< 




r^ 


CO 


6 


i— t 


O 


c 


o 


hJ 




c 


h-1 


r* 


3 


> 


3 
*-> 


t— » 


< 


o 


|J 


O 


r> 


<D 


S 


|H 


£ 


>— I 


< 


O 


« 




rp> 


>H 


2 


c 


Gfl 


'o 






c 


4-1 




'— 

< 


c 



Plate XXXYIII 







SYRINGA VILLOSA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 41 71) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked August, 1924. 



Plate XXXIX 




< 

in 
O 

1-1 



< 

O 

i— i 
M 

CO 



M O 



<u > 

S-i 

< . 






SYRINGA VILLOSA 

Syringa villosa Vahl, Enum. PI. i. 38 (1805-1806). — Mirbel, Hist. Nat. PL xv. 148 
(1805-1806). — F. G. Dietrich, Vollst. Lex. Gartn. Bot. ix. 591 (1809). — Roemer and 
Schultes, Syst. Veg. 1. 77 (181 7). — Sprengel, Syst. Veg. 1. 36 (1825), excluding synonym 
Ligustrum sinense Loureiro. — A. Dietrich, Sp. PL 1. 248 (1831). — D. Dietrich, Syn. 
PL 1. 38 (1839). — Don, Gen. Syst. iv. 51 (1838). — Loudon, Arb. Brit. 11. 1212 
(1838). — De Candolle, Prodr. vm. 283 (1844). — Mollendorf in Zeitschr. Ges. Erdk. 
Berlin, xvi. 136 (1881). — Bretschneider, Early Europ. Researches Fl. China, 121 (1881); 
Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 48, 53, 276, 1056 (1898). — Franchet in Bull. Soc. 
Philom. Paris, ser. 7, ix. 121-127 (1885); Observations sur les Syringa du nord de la 
Chine, reprint, 1, 5 (1885); in Jour. Botanique, rv. 317 (1890); in Rev. Hort. 1891, 308, 
333. — Flatt in Erdesz. Lap. 1887, 568. — Nagy in Gartenflora, xxxvu. 587 (1888). — 
Sargent in Garden and Forest, 1. 222, 520, fig. 38 (1888); in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 7, June 
14 (1911); n. s. 1. 14, 28 (1915). — J. in Garden and Forest, 1. 453 (1888); 309 (1889). — 
P. C. in Garden and Forest, iv. 354 (1891). — L. Henry in Jardin, ix. 76 (1895); m 
Rev. Hort. 1902, 40, t. fig. 1 (as S. Bretschneideri Hort.). — Meehan's Monthly, x. 121, 
fig. (p. 120) (1900). — Grosdemange in Rev. Hort. 1902, 177, fig. 75. — Beissner, Schelle 
and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415 (1903), excluding synonym S. pubescens Turczani- 
nov. — Schneider in Wien. 111. Gartenz. xxvui. 100 (1903); in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. 
ix. 81 (1910); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 226, 230 (191 1); 111. Handb. Laub- 
holzk. 11. 780, fig. 490 e-h (191 1); in Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913). — 
Dunbar in Gard. Mag. 1. 234 (1905); in Amer. Florist, xxrv. 370, fig. (p. 371) (1905). — 
KomarovinAct. Hort. Petrop. xxv. 253 (Fl. Mansh. 111.) (1907), in part. — Rehneltin Gar- 
tenwelt, xvi. 138, 2 figs. (1912). — Grignan in Rev. Hort. 1914,332, fig. 105. — Bean, Trees 
and Shrubs Brit. Isles, 11. 572 (1914). — Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxni. 154, fig. (1916); 
xxxviii. fig. (p. 36) (1923); Aristocrats of the Garden, 223 (1917). — Goeze in Mitt. 
Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 172 (1916). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 
3300, figs. 3759, 3760 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 753 (1927). — Trelease, 
Winter Bot. 313, fig. 3 (1918); PL Mat. Woody Plants, 130 (1921). — Lingelsheim in 
Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 80, fig. 3 d (1920). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, 
Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 405 (1922). — Olmsted, Coville, and Kelsey in Stand. PL 
Names, 485 (1923). — A. 0[sborn] in Garden, lxxxvii. 302 (1923). — Horticulture, n. s. 
in. 279, fig. (1925). — Mottet, Arb. Arbust. Orn. 340 (1925). — Stares, Cerines 
(Syringa L.), 4, 20, fig. 5 (1920), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). — G. Hegi, 111. 
Fl. Mittel-Eur. v. pt. 111. 1910, 191 2 (1927). 

Syringa Ewodi Decaisne in Nouv. Arch. Mus. Paris, ser. 2, 11. 40 (1879), in part, as to 
David specimen no. 2239. — Bretschneider in Bull. Soc. Nat. d'Acclim. France, ser. 
3, ix. 580(1882). — Franchet in Nouv. Arch. Mus. Paris, ser. 2, vi. 84 (1883); 
Plant. David. 1. 204 (1884). — Hemsley in Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxvi. 83 (Ind. Fl. 

81 



I* 



82 THE LILAC 

Sin. n.) (1889), in part, excluding Faber specimen. — L. Henry in Jour. Soc. Hort. 
France, ser. 4, 11. 752 (1901), in part, as to David specimens. — ? Burvenich in 
Rev. Hort. Beige Etr. xxvin. 193, t. (1902), in part. — Wister in House and Garden, 
March, 1926, fig. (p. 72). — House and Garden's Second Book of Gardens, fig. 
(p. 161) (1927). — Not Wallich. 

Syringa Emodi rosea Cornu in Rev. Hort. 1888, 492, t. — L. Henry in Jardin, iv. 126 
(1890); ix. 21 (1895); in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 3, xix. 444 (1897). — Mouille- 
fert, Traite Arb. Arbris. 11. 1000 (1892-1898). — Wittmack in Gartenflora, xliv. 
499, fig. 100 (1895). — Dauthenay in Rev. Hort. 1897, 267. — Bean in Garden, 
mi. 276 (1898). — Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. Suppl. 696 (1900). — Bois in Bull. 
Mus. Hist. Nat. Paris, vn. 232 (1901). — Mottet, Arbust. Orn. 243 (1908). 

Syringa Bretschneideri Lemoine, Cat. no. 115, xix. (1890). — Wien. 111. Gartenz. 369 
(1890). — E. Lemoine in Garden, xxxix. 91, fig. (1891). — G. in Gardening 111. 
xiii. 519, fig. (1891). — L. Henry in Jardin, vin. 102 (1894); xv. 280 (1901); in 
Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 11. 749, 753 (1901). — Zabel in Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges. no. 13, 66 (1904). — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 379 
(1907). — N. E. Brown in Bot. Mag. cxxxvi. t. 8292 (1910), in part. 

S[yringa] affi-nis Emodi (Bretschneider) according to L. Henry in Jardin, rx. 21 (1895), 
as a synonym. 

S[yringa] villosa var. rosea Cornu according to Rehder in Bailey, Cycl. Amer. Hort. rv. 
1762 (1902). — Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. rx. 81 (1910); 111. Handb. Laub- 
holzk. 11. 780 (1911); in Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913). — 
Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-h. 80 (1920). — Stares, Cerines 
(Syringa L.), 25 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, n. (1926). — G. Hegi, 111. Fl. 
Mittel-Eur. v. pt. ni. 1910 (1927). 

S\yringa] villosa var. glabra Schneider in Engler, Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 82, p. 88 

(1905)- 
S\yringa] Josikaea var. eximia [Hort.] according to N. E. Brown in Bot. Mag. cxxxvi. 

t. 8292 (1910), as a synonym. 
S[yringa] villosa var. typica Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. rx. 81 (1910); 111. Handb. 

Laubholzk. 11. 780 (1911). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 80 

(1920). 
S\yringa] rosea Lingelsheim in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. vin. 9 (1910), name only. 
S[yringa] villosa var. typica f. glabra Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. rx. 81 (1910); 

111. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 780 (1911). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 25 (1926), 

reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 
S\yringa) villosa var. typica f. subhirsuta Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. rx. 81 (1910); 

111. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 780 (1911). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 25 (1926), 

reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 
S\yringa] Emodi var. villosa Hort. according to Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. in. 41 

(1917), as a synonym. 
S\yringa] glabra Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-h. 81, fig. 3 e, f 

(1920). 
S\yringa] robusta f. subhirsuta Nakai, Fl. Sylv. Koreana, x. 58 (1921), in part, as to the 

synonym S. villosa var. typica f. subhirsuta Schneider. 
S[yringa] pubescens Hort. according to Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. Freiland- 
Laubgeh. ed. 2, 405 (1922), as a synonym. — Not Turczaninov. 
Syringa villosa emodi Wister in House and Garden, March, 1926, fig. (p. 72), as a 

synonym. 



SYRINGA VILLOSA 83 

A round-topped shrub of dense habit, up to 12 ft. tall, as broad as tall; branches 
upright, sturdy, gray, lenticellate; branchlets glabrous or slightly pubescent, lenticellate. 
Winter-buds ovoid with acute apex, flower bud Y<i in. long more or less, lateral leaf buds 
on each side of terminal bud frequently hardly visible, reddish brown with paler, yellower 
margins; scales acute, puberulous, keeled and forming a four-sided bud. Leaf-scar 
slightly or much raised, shield-shaped, conspicuous, medium size; bundle-trace broad 
V-shaped. Leaves oval, broad-elliptic to oblong, 2-7 in. long, 1-3 in. broad, acute or 
acuminate, base rounded or acute, glabrous, dull dark green above, glaucescent, usually 
villose on midrib and primary veins, occasionally also on leaf-surface, rarely glabrous 
beneath; petiole 3 /io- 7 /io in. long, glabrous, only rarely villose. Inflorescence borne 
on a leafy shoot, terminal, upright, 3-8 in. long, narrowly pyramidal, nearly cylindric, 
or sometimes with basal subdivisions noticeably longer than those near apex in which 
the flowers are often fascicled; rhachis glabrous, only rarely villose, lenticellate; pedicel 
V20 in. long or less, glabrous, only rarely villose; calyx glabrous, only rarely villose, with 
acute teeth; corolla-tube Vio-72 in. long, slender, cylindric; corolla-lobes expanding 
at right angles to corolla-tube, broad near base, rounded or acute, cucullate, sometimes 
with a pronounced hook; corolla % in. in diameter, color in bud corolla-tube Laelia 
Pink, corolla-lobes Laelia Pink to Pale Persian Lilac (xxxvth.) to Pale Vinaceous-Fawn 
(xl.) tinged with Pale Persian Lilac (xxxvin.); when expanded corolla-tube Laelia 
Pink, corolla-lobes Pale Persian Lilac without, white tinged occasionally near throat with 
Pale Persian Lilac (xxxvin.) within; anthers 3 /i 6 in. long, Primrose Yellow (xxx.), 
inserted just below the mouth of corolla-tube and their apex protruding slightly beyond 
the throat. Capsule oblong, smooth or nearly so, YrYh m - l° n g> rounded at apex, each 
valve occasionally ending in a very short, slender tip. (The notes on the color of the 
flowers were taken from a plant (no. 41 71) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 

Habitat: China: provinces of Chihli; Shensi; Shansi. 

Charles Francois Brisseau de Mirbel writes in the "Nouveau Duhamel" (11. 209, 
1804): "II existe a. la Chine une espece de Lilas qui differe des precedents par ses 
feuilles velues en-dessous; elles sont longues d'un pouce environ et pointues aux 
deux bouts. On voit chez M. de Jussieu, dans Pherbier du P. d'Incarville, un 
£chantillon de ce Lilas, recueilli sur les montagnes des environs de Pekin." 

This Lilac, — 5. villosa, — was first named and described one year later by Vahl, 
from the same specimen to which De Mirbel refers. This specimen, which I have 
seen, shows flowers and foliage, but no fruit. 

According to Dr. Emil Bretschneider (Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 46, 
1898) the Frenchman, Pierre dTncarville, was a Jesuit missionary who "sent to 
Paris towards the middle of the 18th cent, an interesting collection of dried plants 
and seeds of the Peking Flora . . . He was a pupil of the great French botanist 
Bernard de Jussieu ... to whom he used to send his collections. . . . Incarville 
on the labels attached to the specimens distinguishes between plants gathered in 
Peking (including probably those collected in the plain which surrounds the capital) 
and plants from the Peking mountains." DTncarville's herbarium is now in the 
Jardin des Plantes, Museum of Natural History, Paris. The collection was deter- 



84 THE LILAC 

mined by Adrien Franchet in 1882 but certain specimens, including S. villosa, 
were determined previous to that date by other botanists. 

Vahl's diagnosis reads: "Syringa foliis oblongis utrinque acutis subtus villosis"; 
he describes the plant's branches as glabrous; its leaves as petiolate, of the length 
of a thumb or larger, perfectly entire, veinless [he refers to the veinlets], slightly 
nerved, pale beneath; its inflorescence as terminal, erect; its flowers as the length 
of a finger nail, [the corolla] four parted. He adds that its branches are angular 
above and its leaves opposite. Vahl thought it might be identical with Ligustrum 
sinense Loureiro. Most other botanists, such as Mirbel (Hist. Nat. PI., 1. c), Don 
and Loudon, were, like Vahl, uncertain as to the identity of the two plants. Sprengel 
named it as a synonym. The Ligustrum sinense of Loureiro (Flora Cochinchinensis, 
1. 19, 1790) is however a Privet and not a Lilac. 

No new specimens of S. villosa are recorded until Adrien Franchet in 1885 
published his " Observations sur les Syringa du nord de la Chine." He writes: 
"Le S. villosa a ete etabli par Vahl sur un specimen unique rapporte de la Chine, 
au milieu du siecle dernier, par le P. dTncarville et conserve, avec son herbier, 
au Museum de Paris. La description de Vahl ne parait pas avoir ete modifiee 
depuis la publication de l'Enumeratio, et dans le Prodrome, de Candolle se contenta 
de reproduire la diagnose dans toute sa brievete, sans meme y joindre la phrase 
complementaire de l'auteur. Aussi n'est-il pas surprenant que l'identite du S. 
villosa ait ete meconnue plus tard par les botanists qui n'avaient pour guide que 
les deux lignes de description donnees dans le Prodrome, vol. viii. 283. II pourra 
neanmoins paraitre singulier que Decaisne qui avait sous la main l'herbier de 
d'Incarville, ait neglige de le consulter, soit pour comparer la plante qu'il nomme 
S. villosa, soit pour la decrire; il ne cite meme pas a son occasion le nom du P. 
d'Incarville et la localite ou il avait trouve sa plante. Tout ceci est certainement 
regrettable, car le Syringa rapporte par M. l'abbe David, et decrit sous le nom de 
S. villosa, est bien different du type original." The S. villosa of Decaisne is identical 
with S. pubescens Turczaninov, as noted under the latter species. Franchet con- 
tinues: "Le meme auteur a fait une nouvelle confusion lorsqu'il a rapproche du 
5. Emodi, Wall., un autre Syringa egalement recolte aux environs de Pekin, par 
M. l'abbe David, et qui n'est autre que le veritable 5. villosa, Vahl. L'hispidite 
de la face inferieure des feuilles, si caracteristique dans cette derniere espece, 
hispidite qui existe sur les specimens de M. l'abbe David et qui fait constamment 
defaut dans la plante de l'Himalaya, ou elle est remplacee sur la nervure mediane 
par une pulverulence a peine visible, aurait cependant du premunir l'auteur de la 
Monographic des Syringa contre une pareille assimilation." Franchet accounts 
for his own similar misclassification in his "Plantae Davidianae" (1883), in a 
footnote, thus: "Lors de la redaction de la premiere partie des Plantae Davidianae, 
les Syringa de la Chine se sont trouves absents de l'herbier du Museum; l'auteur 
a du des lors suivre la Monographic de J. Decaisne, sans etre a meme d'en controler 
les determinations." 



SYRINGA VILLOSA 85 

Franchet by 1885 had however seen these David specimens in addition to that 
of d'lncarville, and he determines as identical with the plant described by Vahl a 
flowering specimen (no. 2239) collected by David in July, 1863, "in cacumine 
montis Ipehoachan." Mr. Rehder tells me that he considers Ipehoachan another 
spelling for Po hua shan; David spelt the name probably as he understood it to 
be pronounced by the Chinese. Franchet writes: "Les specimens rapportes par 
M. l'abbe David ressemblent tout a fait a celui du P. d'lncarville, et fournissent 
des elements plus complets de description." He mentions the fruit as unknown. 
Later (Jour. Botanique, 1. c.) Franchet also mentions a specimen of 5. villosa 
collected "In montis Sy-lin-chan" by Em. Bodinier. 

Bretschneider tells us that the Pere Armand David was attached to the Mission 
of the Lazarists at Peking, and that his specimens in the Museum of Natural 
History, Paris, were determined by Franchet and the determinations published in 
1884 and 1888 (Plantae Davidianae, vols. 1. and 11.). Of Emile Bodinier, a mission- 
ary of the Missions Etrangeres, Bretschneider relates: "Mr. Franchet writes me 
that in 1890 the Paris Museum received, through the medium of Father David, 
930 species of dried plants of the Peking Plain and the mountains west of Peking, 
collected by M. Bodinier, M. Provost . . . and M. Francois. In the Journ. de 
Bot. 1890, 301, where Franchet describes the novelties in the collection he states 
that these plants had been, for a great part, gathered in two little known localities 
in the mountains of North Chihli. One of them is situated 160 kil. west of Peking, 
beyond the Great Wall, where in 1883, on a spur of the celebrated Po hua shan, 
the Trappists have founded a monastery (at Yang kia k'ou). . . . The other locality 
lies farther to the north, in the midst of high mountains, which rise to an elevation 
of 3000 metres. This is about 60 kilom. northwest of Siian hua fu another estab- 
lishment of the Trappists." I have been unable to locate the Sy lin mountains on 
any available map of China. 

To Dr. Bretschneider is due the credit of introducing 5. villosa into cultiva- 
tion. In his book just cited he writes most interestingly of this Lilac : "In the Peking 
mountains, there grow abundantly two beautiful representatives of the genus 
Syringa with bluish-purple flowers like our common Lilac. They have frequently 
been confounded by botanists, but the late C. Maximowicz always considered them 
as two distinct species, as also does Mr. Franchet. In their wild state they are 
easily distinguished from their outer appearance: Syringa villosa Vahl, first dis- 
covered by Father d'lncarville, more than a century and a half ago, was unsatis- 
factorily described, from a specimen (unicum) in Jussieu's herbarium, Paris, by 
Vahl in 1805. . . . This species was rediscovered by Kirilov (Herb. Horti Petrop.). 
It is the larger one, sometimes growing treelike and inhabiting the higher regions 
of the mountains. Mr. O. v. Moellendorf, in ascending the Siao Wu t'ai . . . met 
with large forests of it between 4500 to 6000 feet. To distinguish it from the next 
[S. pubescens Turczaninov] he terms it the 'large-leaved Syringa.' The leaves are 
I 3 / £~3 inches long, ovate, thick. The specific name 'villosa' was unfortunately 



86 THE LILAC 

chosen for the plant, for its leaves are (at least on the specimens I gathered, and 
which were determined by Maximowicz) green and glabrous on both sides; only 
the lower part of the midrib shows some villousness. Large fragrant flowers in 
large panicles. Capsules smooth. The natives call this species ta (great) ting 
hiang." In a footnote Bretschneider adds: "ting hiang (literally 'nail's perfume') 
is properly the Chinese name for cloves, but is also applied to Syringa."* The 
author continues: "Of these two Chinese mountain lilacs I have sent, from 1879 
to 1882, herbarium specimens in flower and plenty of capsules with ripe seeds to 
Kew, the Arnold Arboretum, the Museum d'hist. nat. and the Societe d'acclim., 
Paris, and the Botan. Garden, St. Petersburg, where both these species were 
successfully cultivated. The large-leaved and large-flowered species (S. villosd) 
was first erroneously referred, by the late Professor Decaisne to 5. Emodi Wall., of 
the Himalayas .... The cultivated plant has produced rose-coloured flowers, and 
Prof. M. Cornu of the Museum called it, therefore, 5. Emodi, var. rosea. Some 
French gardeners named it S. Bretschneideri. . . . But it is, as Mr. Franch[et] has 
shown . . . d'Incarville's S. villosa. He was the only botanist enabled to compare 
d'Incarville's typical plant with Father David's specimens, likewise gathered in the 
Peking mountains, and found them to be identical. The plant figured by Sir 
Joseph Hooker in Bot. Mag. t. 7064 (1889) under the name S. villosa is the small- 
leaved S. pubescens (MS note by the late C. Maximowicz)". In a "Liste des graines, 
fruits, etc., de quelques plantes de Pekin, sauvages ou cultivees, envoyees a la 
Societe" which was sent with a letter (dated 1882) to the Societe Nationale d'Accli- 
matation de France Bretschneider cites Syringa emodi. It is not probable that 
the true S. emodi was one of the plants cultivated at Peking and Bretschneider 
was evidently writing of S. villosa. 

We are told by Bretschneider that P. V. Kirilov, who he states also collected 
5. villosa, was appointed physician to the nth Ecclesiastical Mission and travelled 
through Mongolia to Peking with Bunge; he resided in that capital for more than 
ten years and "devoted himself to the investigation of the flora of the Peking plain 
and the adjacent mountains. He was the first botanist to visit, in about 1835, 
the celebrated Mount Po hua shan, about 60 miles west of Peking." 

He also writes of the collections of Otto F. von Mollendorf, who he tells us 
also saw S. villosa in the Hsiao wu tai shan: "The plants collected in 1879 on the 
Siao Wu t'ai shan, together with some duplicates from the former collections were 
transmitted by the collector to me for presentation to the Botan. Garden, St. 
Petersburg. The novelties were described by Maximowicz." A Mollendorf 
specimen (no. 65) is cited by Lingelsheim for his 5. villosa var. a typica; this was 
collected in the Hsiao wu tai shan in Chihli and is undoubtedly the specimen to 
which Bretschneider refers. 

In Mollendorf 's "Reisen und Topographische Aufnahmen in der nord-chinesi- 

* For the resemblance of the Lilac flower-bud to the clove see also S. vulgaris Linnaeus where the similarity 
is recorded in various vernacular names for the Common Lilac. 



SYRINGA VILLOSA 87 

schen Provinz Dshy-li" published in the "Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft fiir Erdkunde 
zu Berlin" in 1881, S. villosa appears in a list of plants collected by Hancock 
and Mollendorf in the Hsiao wu tai shan. These mountains are on the border of 
Chihli and Shansi. The collection was determined by Maximowicz. Reviews 
of this article, including the list of plants collected, appeared in Just's "Botanischer 
Jahresberichte" (dc. pt. 2, 416, 1881 [published in 1884]) and in Engler's "Botanische 
Jahrbucher" (rv. 467, 1883). 

As already noted, the S. emodi of Decaisne is only in part, as to specimen no. 
2239 of the Abbe David from the mountains about Peking, "Ipe-hoa-chan", to be 
referred to S. villosa. In the Museum of Natural History, Paris, there are three 
David specimens, bearing this number, all of flowers and foliage. Franchet (Plan- 
tae Davidianae, 1. c.) for his S. emodi (=5. villosa) only cites the David specimen 
no. 2239a, "Chine: sommet de la montagne dTpehoachan, du nord de Pekin." 
Hemsley's S. emodi, in so far as the Tatarinov, Mollendorf, and David specimens 
are concerned, should be referred to 5. villosa; the Faber specimen from "Mount 
Omei, 10,000 feet," I refer to 5. Komarowi. L. Henry (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, 
1. c.) also incorrectly classifies the David specimen as S. emodi. The Burvenich 
reference is somewhat doubtful. The colored plate is clearly 5. villosa and although 
the article is entitled S. emodi, it is apparent from the text that the author is, in 
part at least, referring to S. villosa. 

In an article entitled "Syringa Emodi a fleurs roses" Maxime Cornu classifies 
the plant, here called S. villosa, as a variety of the Himalayan Lilac. The colored 
plate bears the title Syringa Emodi rosea but that name, although attributed to 
Cornu, is not mentioned in his text (Rev. Hort., 1. c). He tells us of the plant's 
introduction to France, stating that Bretschneider sent, from 1879 to 1881 to 
Decaisne, and from 1881 to 1883 to Bureau, an interesting series of seeds. These 
came principally from the neighborhood of Peking, and especially from the moun- 
tainous regions at an altitude reaching from 2000 to 2500 meters. He writes: 
"Parmi les graines qu'il adressa au Museum, un certain nombre ont germe, malgre 
la longue duree du voyage qu'elles avaient du subir. . . . M. Decaisne partageases 
graines avec le regrette M. Lavallee et avec son collaborateur et ami, M. Naudin, 
V e min ent directeur des Laboratories d'Enseignement superieur de la Villa Thuret 
a, Antibes. Pendant l'interim qui suivit sa mort, on fit de larges distributions de 
ces curieuses plantes de Chine. . . . Le Syringa dont nous possedons le plus d'exemp- 
laires est une expece etiquetee par M. Decaisne: Syringa Emodi. Cette plante 
provenait d'un melange de graines dont les unes donnerent le S. pubescens et les 
autres l'espece dont il est question ici. Nous cultivons depuis longtemps le S. 
Emodi. . . . Ses fleurs blanches, peu elegantes, apparaissent en mai-juin, apres les 
autres Lilas. . . . Les plantes issues des graines de M. le docteur Bretschneider se 
distinguent aisement des autres S. Emodi, dont elles ont, d'ailleurs, la plupart des 
caracteres. Cultivees cote a cote, elles ont montre une vigueur bien plus grande, 
une ampleur de feuilles plus considerable, une floraison tres-abondante, des pani- 



88 THE LILAC 

cules fournies et denses, des fleurs beaucoup plus grandes et plus 6toffees, une 
tendance plus caract6risee a, se dresser en tige, au lieu de buissonner. . . . Malheure- 
usement l'odeur rappelle celle des Ligustrum et est desagreable. La plupart des 
plantes ont la meme apparence et les fleurs ont ete semblables; quelques-unes 
cependant ont 6te plus pales, d'un rose faiblement carn£, mais le plus grand nombre 
avaient des fleurs d'un rose tendre sans teinte bleuatre-lilac6e ou violettes; elles 
palissent d'ailleurs en vieillissant. ... Le S. Emodi des jardins d'Europe peut se 
differencier tres-aisement du nouveau; il a les feuilles plus allongees, plus etroites; 
la vegetation est moins vigoureuse; les fleurs sont d'un blanc creme; et se montrent 
rarement au Museum; les buissons n'atteignent que im20 a im5o. Placee dans des 
conditions plus favorables, dans un sol plus fertile, cette forme de S. Emodi change 
notablement d'apparence; les feuilles deviennent beaucoup plus larges, beaucoup 
plus ovales, et les differences entre les deux se comblent de plus en plus. Cependant 
le S. Emodi de M. le Dr. Bretschneider, cultive cote a cote avec la forme ant6rieure- 
ment introduite, se couvre de fleurs chaque annee depuis quatre ans, tandis que 
l'autre ne fleurit que tres-maigrement. ... Ce Syringa se reproduit de graines 
fidelement, et, comme on l'a vu, les fleurs apparaissent d6ja quatre annees apres le 
semis." Numerous other authors follow Cornu in considering this Chinese Lilac 
to be merely a variety of the Himalayan S. emodi. 

The firm of V. Lemoine et fils of Nancy, when introducing this Lilac, as S. 
Bretschneideri, for sale in France in 1890, writes : "Nous avons recu divers echantillons 
de ce Lilas qui est cultive sous le nom de 5. villosa dans 1' Arnold Arboretum, a Cam- 
bridge (Etats-Unis), et sous celui de 5. Emodi rosea au Museum d'histoire naturelle 
de Paris, et en comparant les branches fleuries que M. le professeur Cornu a bien 
voulu nous communiquer, avec les specimens que nous avions importes d'Amerique, 
nous avons pu nous convaincre que nous avons affaire a une seule et meme espece. 
Cet avis 6tant aussi celui de M. le professeur Sargent, directeur de 1' Arnold Arbo- 
retum, qui a eu l'occasion de comparer de visu les deux plantes, nous nous sommes 
cru autorises, pour couper court a toute espece de confusion, a l'offrir sous le nom 
de S. Bretschneideri, en honneur du botaniste a qui nous devons son introduction 
simultanee dans les jardins d'Europe et d'Amerique." Numerous writers retained 
Lemoine's name S. Bretschneideri. While it cannot be felt that, as was hoped, the 
confusion in regard to the species was helped by the new name, yet it would have 
undoubtedly been more suggestive of the plant's origin, and, as noted by Bret- 
schneider, "the specific name 'villosa' was unfortunately chosen for this plant. . . ." 

Dr. Nakai who examined the specimens of S. villosa in the Museum of Natural 
History, Paris, wrote on June 7, 1924, to Mr. E. H. Wilson: "d'Incarville's speci- 
men has small leaves 1-6 cm. long, glandular-dotted beneath and short compact 
inflorescence; it is not S. Bretschneideri." Mr. C. K. Schneider in June, 1927, 
visited Paris on my behalf and examined Vahl's type specimen. He writes: "I 
cannot see the glands said to be on the leaves beneath by Nakai, but there are 
some very small brownish things the real nature of which I cannot determine. 



SYRINGA VILLOSA 89 

There are some too on the David specimens (2239) which otherwise are just 
alike." 

N. E. Brown (Bot. Mag., 1. c.) retains the name 5. Bretschneideri and writes of 
its introduction to England: "The examples in the Kew collection have been 
received from various sources and under the diverse names of 5. Emodi var. rosea, 
S. villosa, S. Josikaea var. eximia, and S. Emodi, Wall.; that species however 
differs ... in having quite glabrous leaves which are much paler beneath, with a 
different main-venation and a less distinct secondary reticulation; the panicles 
too are smaller and the flowers are white. In the same year our plant was else- 
where referred to as S. villosa, Vahl; Vahl's plant is, however, a very distinct species 
with smaller and rounder leaves, less copious panicles and smaller flowers of a 
paler colour. The species now described is more nearly allied to 5. Josikaea, Jacq., 
of which it has by some growers been considered a variety, than to either of the 
species just mentioned. . . S. Bretschneideri is fond of abundant moisture and 
generous treatment at the root; it thrives well in a rich loamy soil." Judging by 
the color of the flowers of the "Botanical Magazine" plate, it seems possible that 
the drawing was made, not from a plant of S. villosa, but from the plant received 
under the name S. Josikaea var. eximia to which Brown refers. By some, and I 
believe correctly, Eximia has been considered to be, as its producer claimed, a 
form of S. Josikaea, but others have thought it a variety of the hybrid 5. Henryi 
(S. villosa X S. Josikaea). It is certain that forms of this hybrid have been sold 
under the name Eximia. I believe that the plate represents one of these 5. Henryi 
forms, which bear, except in the color of the flowers, which are close to those of S. 
Josikaea, a strong resemblance to both parents, being intermediate in many char- 
acters. Brown himself records its resemblance to the Hungarian plant. J. D. 
Hooker (Bot. Mag. cxv. t. 7064, 1889) had confused the smaller-leaved and smaller- 
flowered S. pubescens with Vahl's S. villosa. Apparently Brown in 1910 still con- 
sidered the Hooker determination to be correct for he differentiates S. Bretschneideri 
from S. villosa by the latter's "smaller and rounder leaves, less copious panicles 
and smaller flowers of a paler color." These characters do not differentiate S. 
Bretschneideri from 5. villosa. Brown's S. Bretschneideri, in so far as a part of the 
text is concerned, in undoubtedly 5*. villosa. 

I include S. Josikaea var. eximia [Hort.] as a synonym of S. villosa since Brown 
states that under that name the plant has been received at Kew and it is of course 
possible that, as such, they received the true S. villosa. W. J. Bean also mentions 
S. Josikaea var. eximia Hort. as a synonym of 5. villosa. 

L. Henry (Jardin, EX. 21, 1895) teus us that as U S. affinis Emodi (Bretschneider)" 
the Museum of Natural History, Paris, distributed, on August 20, 1887, plants of 
S. Emodi rosea [ = S. villosa]. 

I consider to be a synonym the 6". villosa var. glabra Schneider (Engler, Bot. 
Jahrb., 1. c.) which the author reduces (Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov., 1. c.) to S. villosa 
var. typica f. glabra and which Lingelsheim (Engler, Pflanzenr., 1. c.) considers to 



90 THE LILAC 

be a species, 5. glabra. Schneider in first describing this as a new variety of S. 
villosa states that its inflorescences approach those of S. emodi and 5. tomentella, 
but that its flowers are similar to those of the type S. villosa, its anthers not extend- 
ing beyond the throat, its panicles and branchlets glabrous, covered with distinct yel- 
low lenticels. In a note he states that, in his var. typica, the axis of the inflorescence 
is sparingly pubescent with less numerous and less conspicuous lenticels. As type 
of this variety he cites the specimen (no. 7194) collected by the Rev. Giuseppe 
Giraldi; Lingelsheim enumerates for his S. glabra, in addition to this specimen, 
two additional Giraldi examples (nos. 1782, 7195) which I have not seen. I have 
however seen a photograph and fragments of the type specimen (no. 7194) which 
were very kindly sent me by Dr. Pampanini. All these are in the Biondi-Giraldi 
Herbarium in the Botanical Museum, Florence, Italy. According to a record of 
the Giraldi material also supplied by Dr. Pampanini these were collected as follows: 
no. 7194 on July 10, 1900, "in montibus Tsin-ling-san" in northern Shensi; no. 7195 
bears the same date and locality; and no. 1782, on June 20, 1894, "Piccolo monte 
Hua-tzo-pin, distante dal monte Tun-u-sse 10 km. e da Han-Kuin-fu 25 Eon.," 
in southern Shensi. The determinations of Schneider and Lingelsheim are recorded 
on these specimens. By their inclusion the range of S. villosa is considerably ex- 
tended. Lingelsheim in describing his species S. glabra states that in habit it is 
similar to S. villosa, but differs in its flowers subacute in bud, and chiefly in its 
very elongated inflorescences, to 20 cm. long, 4 to 5 cm. broad, interrupted, with 
narrower leaves. He states that the fruit is unknown. The size and form of the 
inflorescence, whether narrow or broad, varies in all Lilac species on the same plant, 
as does also to a great extent the width of the leaves. Schneider's original determi- 
nation, as noted in his use of the name glabra, is based primarily upon the glabrous 
character of the inflorescence and branchlets. I consider pubescence in Lilacs to 
be an inconstant character and have referred this glabrous form to typical S. villosa. 
Two plants of S. villosa growing in the Arnold Arboretum vary considerably in 
this character but are otherwise very similar. 

Schneider described his S. villosa var. typica as having leaves bearded-pubescent 
only beneath on the mid-rib and on the primary veins near the base, very minutely 
pilose inflorescences, and calyx somewhat denticulate on the margin. Lingelsheim, 
who cites as a synonym of his 5. villosa var. a typica the S. villosa var. typica of 
Schneider, notes its leaves as pilose along the veins beneath, and the inflorescence 
with calyx slightly hirsute, spreading. He mentions as example of this variety the 
Mollendorf specimen (no. 65) to which reference has already been made. 

It has been stated that the color of the flowers of the wild plants of 6". villosa 
is bluer than that of the cultivated ones raised from Bretschneider's seed. It was 
on this supposition very largely that were distinguished the 5. Emodi rosea of 
Cornu, the S. rosea of Lingelsheim and the S. villosa var. rosea of Schneider. 

Vahl does not mention the color of the flowers in describing d'Incarville's plant 
and it was doubtless impossible to form any judgment in that regard from the dried 



SYRINGA VILLOSA 91 

specimen. The David specimens were twenty years old when determined by 
Franchet; their color was recorded on the specimens as "lilas." Bretschneider 
tells us that the wild plants of both S. villosa and S. pubescens produce "bluish- 
purple" flowers. A specimen in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum which 
was collected by N. H. Cowdry (no. 1658) in the province of Chihli, Hsiao wu tai 
shan, on July 1, 192 1, records the flowers as "white or light pink." Bretschneider's 
note on the color and those recorded on the David and Cowdry specimens, are the 
only ones which I know describing the color of the flowers of the wild plant. 

Bretschneider notes that the "cultivated plant [of S. villosa] has produced rose- 
coloured flowers." The distinctly pink color of the cultivated plant is confirmed 
by Cornu, to whom is attributed the name rosea, for he writes: "quelques unes 
cependant ont ete plus pales, d'un rose faiblement carne, mais le plus grand nombre 
avaient des fleurs rose tendre sans teinte bleuatre-lilacee ou violettes", and also 
by Bois (Bull. Mus. Hist. Nat. Paris, vn. 232, 1901) who states: "Chez les Lilas de 
Bretschneider les fleurs sont uniformement roses: rose plus ou moins pale, plus ou 
moins came, mais toujours assez attenue." The only colored figure which I have 
found which has been classified as S. villosa, and which shows the cultivated plant 
to have lilac flowers is the S. Bretschneideri of the "Botanical Magazine"; as 
already stated in writing of the synonyms of S. villosa, this illustration bears a 
marked resemblance to Lilacs of the S. Henryi group to which I refer it. 

Upon comparing the flowers (from cultivated plants) of both 5". pubescens and 
S. villosa with Mr. Ridgway's plates we find that those of the former species con- 
tain more blue in their coloring than do those of 5. villosa. No pink variety of 
*S. pubescens has been distinguished although L. Henry (Jardin, vni. 249, 1894) 
notes: "le coloris habituel est le lilas rose; mais il existent maintenant des formes 
blanc carne et d'autres lilas bleuatre." Although, as just stated, upon analysis of 
the color we find in both these species that blue is present, yet the color effect of 
the flowers of both lilacs when grown in the open is pink rather than bluish or 
lilac. It seems strange, in view of the many plants of S. villosa which originated from 
Bretschneider's seed, that all should have differed from the parent plants in their 
coloring. The note on the Cowdry specimen indicates that at least certain of the 
wild plants resemble the cultivated in color. It appears to me probable that, as 
in the color descriptions of the flowers of other species, the color terms were some- 
what vaguely used. L. Henry, writing of the flowers of the cultivated 5. villosa 
raised at the Museum of Natural History, Paris, states that their color was "exclu- 
sivement rose ou rose-lilace, ou blanc rose"; his use of the adjective "lilace" indi- 
cates the presence of a certain amount of blue coloring matter in some of the culti- 
vated plants, just what is found if we compare them with the Ridgway color 
plates. 

The flowers of the three plants of 5. villosa growing in the Arnold Arboretum, 
as well as those of other plants observed, appear for all garden purposes pink, 
despite the presence of the blue already referred to. Until the wild plants can be 



92 THE LILAC 

more carefully studied and their color analyzed, I find little reason to believe that 
they differ sufficiently from their cultivated descendants to justify the retention 
of the latter as a color variety. 

Even Schneider states that his 5. villosa var. rosea differs from the type only in 
its whitish-lilac, "albo-lilacinis", flowers, and writes: "Ich finde zwischen typischer 
villosa und dem was als S. rosea geht keine Unterschiede ausser in Bltitenfarbe, 
die bei villosa mehr gleichmassig hellviolett ist." Yet he uses the adjective "lila- 
cinis" for his variety rosea. In his "Handbuch" Schneider notes that the flowers 
are whitish, tinged rose. Lingelsheim's S. villosa var. d rosea has the inflorescence 
with glabrescent calyx, leaves often very large, and flowers whitish-rose in color. 
He states that it is only known in cultivation. His var. a typica has lilac flowers. 

The S. villosa var. typica f. subhirsuta Schneider, stated by its author (Fedde, 
Rep. Sp. Nov., 1. c.) to differ from the type in having leaves somewhat more villose 
beneath, and the calyx and pedicels with longer scattered hairs, and, again (111. 
Handb. Laubholzk., 1. c.) to differ in having the pedicels (with a very fine pubescence) 
and calyx with scattered pale fine hairs, I include in typical S. villosa. Nakai (Fl. 
Sylv. Kor., 1. c.) mentions as a synonym of his S. robusta f. subhirsuta (which I 
believe identical in part with 5. Wolfi) S. villosa var. typica f. subhirsuta. I cite 
as a synonym of S. villosa Schneider's S. villosa var. typica f. subhirsuta, and as a 
synonym of 5. Wolfi his 5. villosa var. hirsuta from Korea. See S. Wolfi. 

Professor Sargent (Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. in. 41, 191 7) refers to 5. villosa as 
"sometimes called ... 5. Emodi var. villosa." 

Silva Tarouca and Schneider mention S. pubescens Hort. as, in part, a synonym 
of S. villosa. 

L. Henry (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, 1. c.) tells us that S. Bretschneideri first 
bloomed at the Museum of Natural History, Paris, in 1886, and that the flowers 
were exhibited on May 27, 1886, at a meeting of the Societe nationale d'horti- 
culture de France. In 1887 it was distributed by the Museum in the form of 
living plants. He mentions the color of its flowers as "jusqu'ici exclusivement 
rose ou rose lilace, ou blanc rose, d'un ton tres frais et tres agreable." He comments 
that the fragrance of the flowers suggests that of the Privet, but is less disagreeable 
than that of S. emodi. The plant fruits abundantly and is "plus que toute autre 
espece, sujet aux attaques de la Cochenille et de la Zeuzere. II parait se plaire 
particulierement dans les terres saines, chaudes et impregnees de sulfate de chaux. 
II se multiplie aisement de graines, et les jeunes plantes croissent rapidement. 
Les bonnes varietes se greffent sur franc. On peut aussi le greffer sur Lilas com- 
mun, et inversement." Bois (Bull. Mus. Hist. Nat. Paris, vn. 232, 1901) notes of 
S. Emodi var. rosea: "II a fleuri pour la premiere fois dans notre Etablissement, en 
1886 (dans la partie du Jardin dite le carre des couches, aupres de la Fosse aux 
ours). . . . L'introduction et la propagation de cette nouvelle plante sont dus 
entierement au Museum." 

Grosdemange (Rev. Hort., 1. c.) discusses S. villosa's method of flowering. 



SYRINGA VILLOSA 93 

Grignan (Rev. Hort., 1. c.) shows an excellent photograph of this species grown 
in tree, or standard form, in the garden of Georges Boucher, avenue d'ltalie, Paris. 
Lilacs grown in this form are more common on the continent of Europe than in the 
United States. 

While visiting the Central Experimental Farm at Ottawa, Canada, in June, 
1927, I saw the collection of hedges grown for demonstration purposes. One of 
S. villosa, planted in 191 1, is now about twenty feet broad and about fifteen feet 
tall. It forms a handsome hedge but is not so striking as one of 5. Josikaea. See 
S. Josikaea. 

Of S. villosa in Great Britain W. J. Bean writes: "The beautiful lilac, perhaps 
the most robust of its section of the genus, flowers at the end of May and early in 
June, after the flowers of the common lilac and its varieties have faded. It is one 
of the most desirable of hardy shrubs, vigorous in constitution, and free flowering." 

Professor C. S. Sargent (Garden and Forest, 1. c.) who at once identified the 
plant raised from Dr. Bretschneider's seed with S. villosa suggests that possibly 
to that species should be referred 5. emodi and S. Josikaea. He notes certain 
differences however: "In the Himalaya plant (S. Emodi), however, the long, 
white hairs which cover the under side of the leaves of S. villosa, are replaced by a 
minute puberulence on the mid-rib, which is even less developed on the leaves of 
S. Josikaea. The bark, color and markings of the young shoots and the habit of 
these three plants are identical, although in S. Josikaea the leaves are narrower 
than in the Chinese plant, but not narrower than those of many Himalaya speci- 
mens. ..." Franchet in his monograph had compared S. villosa and S. Josikaea 
in certain particulars; with some of these Flatt (Erdesz. Lap. 1887, 1. c.) dis- 
agrees. 

Professor Sargent's article includes an excellent picture of the flowers of S. villosa, 
taken from a plant raised at the Arnold Arboretum from Bretschneider's seed. 
He writes of this Lilac when first introduced into the United States: "Syringa 
villosa is a vigorous and very hardy shrub, now five feet high here, by as much 
through the branches, with stout, erect, pale brown shoots, marked with white 
spots, broad and ample pale green strongly reticulate- veined leaves, and narrow, 
and rather obtuse, often interrupted clusters of pale rose or flesh-colored flowers, 
which are decidedly less fragrant than those of the common Lilac. They appear 
here towards the end of May. 5. villosa is a valuable and desirable addition to 
gardens. The only drawback which it has yet developed as an ornamental plant 
is found in the fact that its leaves fall very early, or after the first frost, without 
any change of color." 

E. H. Wilson writes in his "Aristocrats of the Garden": "Of the late-flowering 
Lilacs the best known in this country and perhaps the hardiest of all is 5. villosa, 
a native of northern China. ... It is a large shrub of excellent habit with erect, 
fairly stout branches and oblong-lance-shaped, rather pale green leaves. The flowers 
are rose-colored, pink, or nearly white, but they have an unpleasant odor. It is, 



94 THE LILAC 

however, a first-rate garden shrub, exceedingly floriferous, and very valuable for 
its hardiness and for its late flowers." 

Dr. W. T. Macoun (Report of the Dominion Horticulturist for the year 1922, 
p. 37) mentions S. villosa among the best ornamental shrubs hardy at Ottawa, 
Canada. 

S. villosa is listed for sale in many nursery catalogues of the United States. It 
is not uncommon however to find that the plant grown under that name is not the 
true S. villosa but one of the S. Henryi hybrids. 

In the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum are numerous specimens collected 
from wild plants of S. villosa. F. N. Meyer found it (no. 125) on the Hsiao wu tai 
shan in the province of Chihli on August 12, 191 3, growing at an elevation of over 
9000 ft.; and again (no. n 73) in the same locality on April 12, 1913; the leaves 
on these specimens are in some instances unusually large. Father Chanet also 
gathered it (no. 11) in Chihli in 1918, but the precise date and locality are not 
recorded. Specimens were also collected by Joseph Hers in Chihli, (nos. 1554, 
1533, 1535) in the Hsiao wu tai shan on July 14, 1921, — the Chinese name is 
given as "ting siang," and (nos. 21 17, 2 131) from the same mountain range, at 
Tieh ling sze, at an altitude of 1300 meters, on October 7, 1922, — the Chinese 
name given as "tsiao lien hua." N. H. Cowdry found it (no. 1658) on the Hsiao 
wu tai shan, province of Chihli, on July 13, 192 1, and he notes: "Mountain slopes. 
Fls. white or light pink. Shrub 5 ft." C. O. Lee collected it (no. 6088) in Shansi, 
at Tung tsa, at an altitude of 4000 to 5000 ft. in July, 1924. J. Hers gathered it 
(no. 2638) through Chinese collectors in the Wu tai shan in Shansi at 1600 meters 
on July 31, 1923. In regard to the Cowdry specimen it should be stated that, 
although the label gives Shansi as the province where Cowdry collected the plant 
the Hsiao wu tai shan is in Chihli, not in Shansi; it has been impossible to locate 
on any available map Tung tsa where Lee collected his plant; the Hers specimen 
(no. 2638) from the Wu tai shan is therefore the most satisfactory record of its 
occurrence in Shansi. 

At one time a plant of S. villosa was growing in the Arnold Arboretum which was 
raised from grafts (S. P. I. 22,675) supplied by the U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, in 
May, 1908; this plant has disappeared but herbarium specimens taken from it are 
preserved. According to the records (U. S. Dept. Agric, Bur. PI. Industry, Bull, 
no. 143, 24, 1909) it came from "Nansante Temple, Wutaushan, Shansi, China." 
Meyer's field notes read: "(No. 269, Feb. 26, 1906) A lilac found growing at high 
elevations, 7000 to 8000 feet. Said to bear large panicles of white flowers. Chinese 
name 'Sar shu.' " In his "Chinese Plant Names" (12, 191 1) Frank N. Meyer gives 
as common name for the plant no. 138 which he calls 5. villosa (?), "Sha Shu." 

Numerous specimens, taken from plants cultivated in European collections, 
are also preserved. Two examples from the herbarium of C. K. Schneider show 
that it was grown in the Vorwerker Baumschule at Liibeck, Germany, — one of 
these bears the name S. Bretschneideri X emodi ?, the other 5. Bretschneideri. 



SYRINGA VILLOSA 95 

From the herbarium of H. Zabel are two specimens, also collected at the Vorwerker 
Baumschule, which were determined as S. Bretschneideri; it is noted that one was 
there cultivated as S. emodi, the other as S. emodi rosea. Also from the Zabel 
herbarium are two examples from plants cultivated in the Botanischer Garten der 
Forstakadamie, Muenden, Hanover (nos. 23 and 41) ; no. 23 came from the Botanic 
Garden at Gottigen in 1882 where it was raised by Regel from Peking seed and 
where it bore the name S. emodi; no. 41 came from Paris in 1892 under the name 
S. villosa. From the herbarium of Dr. C. Baenitz are two examples ; one, determined 
as S. villosa Vahl, came from Schneitniger Park, Breslau, in Silesia; the other, deter- 
mined as S. rosea (Cornu) Lingelsh[eim], from the Royal Botanic Garden at Breslau. 

S. villosa was offered for sale in the catalogues of such nurserymen as : in Germany, 
Dieck (1887, 27), Spath (no. 69, 114, 1887-1888); in France, Simon-Louis (1894- 
1895, 24) as S. emodi rosea or Lilas de l'Himalaya rose and as S. villosa, Lilas 
velu; in the United States, Parsons (1890, 94), Ellwanger and Barry (1892, 100; 
1900, 86, fig.). The plant was probably offered earlier by these firms, as well as by 
others. 

There are growing in the Arnold Arboretum three good-sized plants of 5. villosa. 
The oldest of these (no. 41 71 Am. Arb.) was raised from seed (no. 1430) received on 
March 24, 1896, from Messrs. Vilmorin-Andrieux and Co., Paris, France; the other 
two (no. 17,362 Arn. Arb.) were received as plants from Holm Lea, Brookline, 
Massachusetts, in April, 1907. The earlier history of these three plants is not known 
although it is probable that the Vilmorin seed came from Bretschneider and that 
the Holm Lea plants were also raised from seed of his collecting. All plants once 
raised in the Arboretum from seed received directly from Bretschneider in 1882 
have unfortunately disappeared. The three plants are of a similar habit. One, 
the largest and oldest, is about eleven feet tall, and of equal breadth; all are round- 
topped, with gray, lenticellate, sturdy, upright branches; the leaves are large, and 
the shrub well foliaged from base to top. 5. villosa is here, as a rule, entirely free 
from mildew. Each year, with regularity, these three plants bloom profusely and, 
when covered with large clusters of pale pink or flesh-colored flowers, are exceedingly 
showy and handsome. The flowers fade almost white. The species is "tidy," with 
few twigs, and rarely any dead wood, and is one of the hardiest of all Lilacs. The 
odor of the flowers, frequently noted as objectionable, is not, in the open at least, 
so disagreeable as to warrant the plant's exclusion from a garden. Its flowering 
period follows that of 5. vulgaris and its forms, and prolongs the Lilac season by 
about two weeks. To develop properly, a plant of 5. villosa should be given plenty 
of room, — a radius of ten feet is none too much, — for much of the beauty of the 
species exists in its fine symmetrical habit. One of the plants (no. 41 71 Arn. Arb.) 
in the Arboretum is more glabrous than the other two (nos. 17,362 Arn. Arb.), 
and, were pubescence to be considered a reliable character, might be classified as 
Schneider's glabrous form. The two plants from Holm Lea appear to bloom slightly 
later each year than the one raised from Vilmorin's seed. 



96 THE LILAC 

S. villosa has been called by Don (Gen. Syst., 1. c.) and others the Villous Lilac; 
Nash (Jour. N. Y. Bot. Gard. xx. 234, 1919) gives it the common name of Hairy 
Chinese Lilac. The name Hairy Lilac, noted as English, was applied to 5. villosa 
by F. G. Dietrich (Vollst. Lex. Gartn. Bot. ix. 591, 1809); he also notes the German 
common name of Weichhaariger Flieder. The approved common name of Late 
Lilac has been adopted by "Standardized Plant Names." In French literature 
and catalogues it frequently appears as the Lilas de Bretschneider and as S. Emodi 
a fleurs roses. Simon-Louis calls it Lilas velu and also Lilas de l'Himalaya rose. 

This species is most nearly related to S. tomentella Bureau and Franchet and to 
S. Sweginzowii Koehne and Lingelsheim. It differs considerably, however, from 
both of these Lilacs in general appearance, being sturdier in habit and producing 
its more compact and heavier flower clusters in a stiffer and more upright fashion. 
While often confused with 5. pubescens the two belong to different groups of Lilacs, 
— the flower clusters of S. villosa, which are leafy at the base, appearing normally 
from terminal buds, while those of 5. pubescens, non-leafy at the base, are produced 
normally from lateral buds. 

Foliage, said to have come from the Sacred Tree growing in the Lamasery at 
Kum-bum, in the province of Kansu, China, was identified by Hemsley with S. 
villosa. The identity of this tree is discussed under S. pekinensis Ruprecht. 

Although never given a name, nor introduced into cultivation, there did at one 
time exist a variegated-leaved plant of S. villosa. Maxime Cornu (Rev. Hort. 
1888, 493), of 5. Emodi a, fleurs roses at the Jardin des Plantes, writes: "L'un des 
pieds presenta des feuilles jaune d'or, par places, quoique saines; mais il ne fut 
pas note d'une maniere suffisante et n'a pas ete retrouve avec certitude." Although 
Cornu believed that S. Emodi rosea was only a variety of the Himalayan Lilac, 
yet he was not confused as to the different appearance of S. emodi, long cultivated 
at the Jardin des Plantes, and the new pink flowered variety raised from Bret- 
schneider's seed. There was evidently produced therefore, at one time, a varie- 
gated-leaved plant of S. emodi rosea, or S. villosa. After mentioning this form 
Cornu goes on to describe the variegated-leaved forms of the real 5. emodi to which 
he refers as the "S. emodi cultive jusqu'ici." This is, so far as I know, the only 
record of a variegated form of S. villosa. 

A spontaneous variety of S. villosa has been described as : 

Syringa villosa var. Limprichtii Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 
80 (1920). — Limpricht in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov., Beihefte, xn. 462 (Bot. Reisen Hochgeb. 
China Ost-Tibets) (1922). 

Habitat: China: province of Chihli. 

This variety, not in cultivation, which he calls var. /3 Limprichtii, was founded 
by Lingelsheim upon a specimen (no. 599) collected by W. Limpricht in the province 
of Chihli, China, in the Hsiao wu tai shan. According to the collector it was found 
at 3100 meters altitude, "Abhange unter dem Gipfel." 



SYRINGA VILLOSA 97 

Lingelsheim describes its inflorescence as few-flowered, interrupted, 5 centi- 
meters long more or less, glabrescent; the branchlets of the current year often 
somewhat spinescent; the flowers lilac. 

By spinescent branches Lingelsheim possibly means, not thorny, but rigid. 

I have not seen this Limpricht specimen but except for the character of the 
branches find nothing in the description to differentiate the plant from the glabrous 
examples of S. villosa. The elevation and the difficult conditions under which the 
plant was growing probably had some influence in producing this rigid (?) character. 

To this species belongs the garden form: 
Semiplena Hort. Paris. 

Syringa Emodi rosea semiplena [Hort. Paris] according to Render in Holler's Deutsch. 

Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 207 (1899). 
Syringa emodi f. semiplena Hort. according to Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. 
Laubholz-Ben. 415 (1903), name only. — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, 
pt. i-n. 78 (1920), name only. 

Writing of S. villosa, which he calls S. Bretschneideri, L. Henry (Jardin, iv. 126, 1890) 
tells us: "Souvent les divisions de la corolle se montrent au nombre de 5, 6 et meme 7, et 
il n'est pas rare de rencontrer des etamines qui commencent a se transformer en pieces 
petaloides. Cette tendance a la duplicature est d'un bon augure pour l'avenir; nul doute 
que d'habiles cultivateurs n'en profitent pour obtenir prochainement une serie de formes 
des plus ornementales." And again Henry writes (Jardin, ix. 22, 1895) : "Une particu- 
larity a signaler dans cette espece, c'est une grande tendance a la duplicature par transfor- 
mation des etamines en pieces petaloides distinctes. Les exemplaires ne sont pas rares 
sur lesquels cette tendance se manifeste a des degres variables. En mai 1894, nous avons 
trouve au Museum un individu remarquable sous ce rapport : la duplicature en est presque 
complete et touche a la plenitude." And Henry further (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 

4, h. 750, 1901) states: "Cette remarquable espece . . . n'a encore que peu varie; 
cependant les semis nous ont donne quelques formes d'un coloris un peu plus intense, et 
aussi des formes a fleurs semi-doubles. Les formes les plus belles sont aussi les plus tar- 
dives." 

A. Gourlot (Jardin, xi. 150, 1897) in his article, "Hybrides et formes doubles du Lilas 
de Bretschneider, " writes: " Dans la meme presentation de jeudi dernier [Societe nationale 
d'horticulture de France, May 13, 1897] figurait aussi une inflorescence semi-double de ce 
beau Lilas de Bretschneider. Nous savons qu'au Museum plusieurs exemplaires sont en 
observation qui presentent cette interessante particularite, deja signalee. . . ." 

Apart from the citations from Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, and from Lingelsheim in 
the bibliography, I have found no mention of a semi-double form of the Himalayan Lilac, 

5. emodi; and in these no description is given. The species S. emodi and S. villosa 
were frequently confused and I believe that, in all probability, these references indicate 
a misclassification. 

Render at one time considered S. villosa to be merely a synonym of S. Emodi rosea 
Cornu [= S. villosa}. His S. Emodi rosea semiplena originated in the Jardin des 
Plantes, Paris. 

It is doubtful whether this form is any longer in cultivation. 



Plate XL 




SYRINGA HENRYI "LUTECE" 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 5208-1) 

Winter buds, enlarged. January, 1026. 



Plate XLI 










SYRINGA HENRYI "LUTECE" 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 5208-1) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. April 30, 1926. 



Plate XLII 




SYRINGA HENRYI "LUTECE" 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 5208-1) 

Flower clusters. June 20, 1924. 



Plate XLIII 







. 



SYRINGA HENRYI "LUTECE" 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 5208-1) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked August, 1924. 



Plate XLIV 




X SYRINGA HENRYI 

A hybrid between S. Josikaea Jacquin fil. and 5. villosa Vahl is: 

X Syringa Henryi Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. ix. 81 (iqio); 111. Handb. 
Laubholzk. n. 781 (191 1); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 230 (191 1); in Silva 
Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1903). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 7, 
June 14 (1911); no. 23, May 22 (1912); no. 40, May 9 (1913); n. s. 1. 14, 25 (1915). — 
Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxiii. 155 (1916); Aristocrats of the Garden, 228 (1917). — Rehder 
in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3300 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 753 (1927). — 
Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 80 (1920). — Silva Tarouca and 
Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 404 (1922). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in 
Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923), as a synonym. — Mottet, Arb. Arbust. Orn. 341 (1925). — 
Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 32 (1926); reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). — G. 
Hegi, 111. Fl. Mittel-Eur. v. pt. in. 191 1 (1927). 

S[yringa] Emodi rosea X S\yringa] Josikaea Dauthenay in Rev. Hort. 1897, 2 ^7- — Bois 

in Bull. Mus. Hist. Nat. Paris, vn. 233 (1901). 
S[yringa] Josikaea X S[yringa] Emodi rosea Dauthenay in Rev. Hort. 1897, 267. — Rehder 

in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 207 (1899). — Bois in Bull. Mus. Hist. Nat. 

Paris, vn. 233 (1901). — Jour. Hort. Soc. London, xxvn. t. (opp. p. 801) (1903). 
Syringa Bretschneideri X Josikaea var. Luthce Simon-Louis, Cat. 1900-1901, 67. — L. 

Henry in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 11. 755 (1901). 
S[yringa) Bretschneideri X S\yringa] Josikaea L. Henry in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 

11. 754 (1901). 
S[yringa] Josikaea X S[yringa] Bretschneideri L. Henry in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 

11. 755 (1901). 
Syringa Josikaea hyb[rida] Lutece Lemoine, Cat. no. 149, 27 (1901). 
Syringa Bretschneideri hybrida (Syringa Bretschneideri X S. Josikaea) L. Henry in Rev. 

Hort. 1902, 41, t. fig. 3. 
Syringa Josikaea hybrida (Syringa Josikaea X S. Bretschneideri) L. Henry in Rev. Hort. 

1902, 41. 
Syringa Bretschneideri hybrida Lutece L. Henry in Rev. Hort. 1902, 41. — Lemoine, Cat. 

no. 152, 31 (1902). 
Syringa villosa X Josikaea Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415 

(i9°3)- 
Syringa Josikaea X villosa Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415 

(i9°3)- 
Syringa Bretschneideri N. E. Brown in Bot. Mag. cxxxvi. t. 8292 (1910), in part, as to 

the plant figured. 
S[yringa] villosa var. Lutece Hort. Simon-Louis according to Schneider, 111. Handb. 

Laubholzk. 11. 781 (191 1); in Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913). 

99 



100 THE LILAC 

S\yringa] Henryi var. Lutfae Hort. Paris according to Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 7, 
June 14 (iqii); no. 23, May 22 (1912); no. 40, May 9 (1913); n. s. 1. 14, 28 (1915). — 
Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxiii. 155 (1916); Aristocrats of the Garden, 228 (1917). — 
Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3300 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 
753 (1927). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 404 
(1922). — Mottet, Arb. Arbust. Orn. 341 (1925). 

S\yringa] Bretschneideri X Josikaea (S. eximia) var. Lutece Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, ac- 
cording to Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 94 (1920), as a synonym. 

S[yringa) hybrida Hort. (S. Emodii X vulgaris) according to Hand-List Trees and Shrubs 
Royal Bot. Gardens Kew, 236 (1925). 

S[yringa] Emodii var. hybrida Hort. according to Hand-List Trees and Shrubs Royal 
Bot. Gardens Kew, 236 (1925), as a synonym. 

The S. Henryi hybrids, which are very similar in general habit and in foliage 
to the parents S. villosa and S. Josikaea, are distinguished in their flowers by the 
form of the corolla-tube, which is less cylindric than that of 5. villosa and less 
funnelform than that of S. Josikaea, by the size of the anthers, which are smaller 
than those of S. villosa and larger than those of 5. Josikaea, and by their position 
in the corolla-tube where they are inserted slightly higher than those of S. Josikaea 
and slightly lower than those of S. villosa. In color the flowers vary a little on 
different plants but all contain considerable blue in their coloring matter and in 
this show their S. Josikaea ancestry. The following color notes were taken from a 
plant (no. 17,352 Am. Arb.) which was received at the Arnold Arboretum from 
Mr. A. Hunnewell, Wellesley, Massachusetts, in April, 1907, under the name S. 
Henryi Lutece. Color in bud Light Perilla Purple to Argyle Purple or Purplish 
Lilac (xxxvu.) ; when expanded Argyle Purple or Purplish Lilac or Light Pinkish 
Lilac (xxxvu.) both within and without; anthers Primrose yellow (xxx.). 

From the same plant the additional notes were also taken: the winter-buds 
ovoid with acute apex, flower bud ^ in. long more or less, scales reddish to yel- 
lowish brown marked with gray, acuminate or acute, keeled, puberulous; leaf- 
scar slightly raised, shield-shaped, inconspicuous, large; bundle-trace crescent- 
shaped; the capsule oblong, smooth, }4r 2 A m - l° n g> obtusish or acute. 

The hybrid Lilacs to which the name 5. Henryi was later applied by Schneider 
originated from crossings made by Louis Henry in the Jardin des Plantes, Paris. 
Under the title "Nouveaux Lilas hybrides" their producer first wrote (Jour. Soc. 
Hort. France, ser. 3, xix. 444, 1897) of the origin of these plants: ". . . La presque 
complete uniformite du coloris dans les L. de Bretschneider obtenus de semis, 
m'a suggere l'idee de chercher a les faire varier. Le S. Josikaea Jacq. fil., voisin 
de S. Bretschneideri, m'a paru, avec son coloris fonce tirant sur le bleu, de nature 
a produire le resultat desire. . . . Encourage par M. le professeur Maxime Cornu 
et bien seconde par M. Grosdemange, j'ai croise, avec tous les soins necessaires, 
le Lilas de Bretschneider par le L. de Hongrie et inversement. Environs deux cent 
soixante-quinze exemplaires ont ete obtenus; deux fleurirent des 1896. Une dou- 
zaine ont fleuri cette annee et m'ont permis de faire la presentation du 13 Mai." 



SYRINGA HENRYI 101 

Two crosses were shown at the meeting of the Societe nationale d'horticulture 
de France in the name of Professor Maxime Cornu; Henry gives them no name at 
this time. The first was "Croisement du Lilas de Bretschneider par S. Josikaea 
(fait les 13, 14, 22 et 23 Mai 1890)." Of the plants raised from this cross he notes 
the following characters: " Vegetation et rameaux se rapprochant beaucoup du 
L. de Bretschneider. Feuilles moins grandes et moins fermes que dans ce dernier, 
plus elargies que dans le S. Josikaea; velues sur la face inferieure, comme dans le 
L. de Bretschneider (dans le S. Josikaea, elles sont glabres). Inflorescences: forme 
de celles du L. de Bretschneider, c'est-a-dire beaucoup plus ramifiees et plus 
longuement que dans le S. Josikaea, et, partant, plus amples et plus fournies; 
pyramidales et en thyrses bien degages; rachis et petiole teintes violace et d'appar- 
ence pruineuse comme dans le S. Josikaea. Fleurs se rapprochant beaucoup de 
celles du 5. Josikaea: i° par le coloris violet ou violace, au lieu d'etre rose ou blanc 
rose comme dans le L. de Bretschneider; 2 par les dimensions sensiblement plus 
petites (1) et plus greles que dans le L. de Bretschneider; 3 par la forme en cornet 
plutot qu'en entonnoir; toutesfois les divisions sont plus grandes, plus arrondies, 
moins incurvees que dans S. Josikaea, et elles finissent gen£ralement par s'etaler 
comme dans le L. de Bretschneider." In a footnote (1), he adds, "Les pieds sur 
lesquels ont ete coupees les inflorescences presentees ont ete transplanted au mois 
de feVrier dernier. Cette circonstance a certainement influe sur le developpement 
des thyrses et sur la grandeur des fleurs." 

The second was "Croisement du S. Josikaea par le Lilas de Bretschneider 
(fait le 22 mai 1890)." Of this Henry writes: "Le resultat s'est montre assez 
sensiblement le meme que dans 1 'operation inverse. . . . Les feuilles sont plus 
allongees, plus longuement acuminees, et en general, moins velues; les inflorescences 
sont un peu moins fournies et le rachis plus fonce. Les boutons sont plus rouges 
et les divisions de la fleur plus etalees et plus recurvees. Les fleurs presentent 
aussi plus de rouge, et quelques exemplaires les ont d'un coloris pourpre tres 
special." 

Henry summarizes the influence of the parents thus: "Le Lilas de Bretschneider 
se retrouve surtout dans les caracteres de vegetation, les tiges, les feuilles et la 
forme des inflorescences. L'empreinte du 5. Josikaea se manifeste particuliere- 
ment dans la fleur: coloris, dimensions et forme." To emphasize the care with 
which these crosses were made, Henry notes: "Parmi les inflorescences de Lilas de 
Bretschneider choisies a cet effet, l'une d'elles avait ete confiee a un jardinier qui, 
lors de la castration, avait laisse un certain nombre d'etamines. Ce defaut de soin 
ne passa pas inapercu et les graines furent notees comme douteuses: or, dans le 
lot de plantes provenant de ces graines, quelques-unes ne sont pas autre chose 
que des L. de Bretschneider." 

In "Le Jardin" (xi. 228, 1897) the appearance of this article is recorded. The 
"Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society" (xxvu. t. (p. 800), 1902) gives a 
plate with three figures, — S. Josikaea, S. Emodi rosea and the hybrid. 



102 THE LILAC 

Bois (Bull. Mus. Hist. Nat. Paris, vn. 232, 1901) states that Henry began 
making these crosses in 1890 and "les poursuivit pendant dix ans." 

Dauthenay (Rev. Hort., 1. c.) describes the two crosses as 5. Emodi rosea X 
S. Josikaea, and as S. Josikaea X S. Emodi rosea. A. Gourlot (Jardin, xi. 150, 
1897) writes about Henry's work under the title "Hybrids et formes doubles du 
Lilas de Bretschneider," but he gives no name to the crosses. He stresses the new 
colors obtained: "Jusqu'a present, le L. de Bretschneider n'avait donne, par le 
semis, que des exemplaires rose carne ou blanc legerement rose. L'influence du 
S. Josikaea, — qui est, comme on sait, violet fonce, — a eu pour resultat de donner 
des fleurs dans lesquelles le violet et le pourpre tiennent une large place; certains 
de ces coloris sont inedits dans la gamme pourtant si riche des Lilas." Gourlot 
felt that Henry's work was not sufficiently appreciated when exhibited: "Le comite 
d'Arboriculture d'Ornement de la Societe nationale d'horticulture a ete plutot . . . 
disons tiede pour rester courtois." 

It was not until 1902 (Rev. Hort., 1. c.) that Henry gave his crosses the names, 
Syringa Bretschneideri hybrida (S. Bretschneideri X S. Josikaea) and Syringa 
Josikaea hybrida (S. Josikaea X S. Bretschneideri). He gives a colored plate 
showing the flowers of 5. Josikaea, of S. Bretschneideri, and also of one of his 
hybrids: "La planche coloriee ci-jointe represente l'une des formes . . . obtenues, 
forme tres voisine de celle mise au commerce par les Pepinieres Simon-Louis, de 
Plantieres-les-Metz, sous le nom de Lutece." 

The name 5. Henryi was given these hybrids by C. K. Schneider (Fedde, Rep. 
Sp. Nov., 1. c.) in 1910, as a tribute to their producer, and has since been generally 
adopted. Many plants were put on the market and it is undoubtedly true that 
under that name have been sold, not only the true hybrids, which vary greatly in 
the beauty of their flowers, but also the species S.villosa and S. Josikaea and its forms. 

The foliage of S. villosa and of 5. Josikaea is very similar in form; in both it 
is glabrous above and varies in the amount of pubescence beneath; in both the 
leaves are dark green above and glaucescent beneath. The chief difference appears 
to be that the leaves of S. Josikaea are more lustrous above than are those of 
S. villosa. 

The flowers of 5. villosa appear to me distinct in appearance; they are character- 
ized by their pale pink or flesh color lacking much blue coloring matter (the blue 
is scarcely noticeable unless the colors are compared with a color chart); by their 
cylindric corolla- tube ; by their corolla-lobes, pronouncedly hooked at the apex 
and expanding at a right angle to the corolla- tube; by the large size of their anthers 
(close to 3 /i6 in. long), and by their position in the corolla- tube where they are 
inserted just below the mouth. 

The flowers of 5. Josikaea are characterized by their funnelform corolla-tube, 
with wide mouth, by their erect corolla-lobes, by their small anthers (close to Vis 
in. long), and by their position in the corolla-tube, where they are inserted slightly 
above the middle. 



SYRINGA HENRYI 103 

When we examine the hybrid plants we find the leaves sometimes lustrous 
above, sometimes not; they even appear to vary on an individual plant in this 
regard. The size of the leaves, which Henry noted as intermediate between the 
two parents, I have found to be an unsatisfactory guide since they vary in this 
particular, not only on the parent plants, but also on the hybrids, in accordance 
with the vigor of the plant. The only characters which to me appear determining 
are the form of the flowers and the size and position of the anthers. The corolla- 
tube is between funnelform (as in S. Josikaea) and cylindric (as in S. villosa); 
as a rule the corolla-lobes expand finally to a right angle with the corolla-tube as 
they do in S. villosa; the anthers are intermediate in size between those of the two 
parent species (close to % in. long), and are inserted slightly higher than in 
S. Josikaea and not so high as in 5. villosa. The flowers, as in S. Josikaea, contain 
much blue coloring matter. 

The firm of Simon-Louis freres, in 1900 (Cat. 1900-1901, 67), under the title 
"Syringa Bretschneideri X Josikaea var. Lutece" introduced a Lilac, which by 
some is said to be the type of these S. Henryi hybrids. Schneider however mentions 
no type. In his "Handbuch" he states: "Als erste dieser Formen scheint S. villosa 
var. 'Lutece' Hort. Simon-Louis in den Handel gekommen zu sein." The name 
does not appear in this form in the Simon-Louis reference but as Syringa Bret- 
schneider X Josikaea var. Lutece. The firm describes it as 'Tune des plus meritantes 
de cette serie. Les inflorescences sont amples, bien fournies, pyramidales, longues 
de 25 a 28 cent. Les fleurs, d'abord pourpre bleuatre, passent au lilas cendre 
bleuatre." Henry's figure in the "Revue Horticole" for 1902, which is cited by 
Schneider in first writing of the 5. Henryi hybrids, shows a flower cluster said to 
be "tres voisine" to the Simon-Louis plant. All the forms however bear a resem- 
blance to each other and I have been unable to discover, either in such descriptions 
as exist, or from the examination of herbarium specimens or living plants, any 
characters serving to differentiate the form Lutece. Professor Sargent, in the 
"Bulletin of Popular Information" of the Arnold Arboretum, has often noted 
the value of S. Henryi Lutece; he states (Bull. Arn. Arb. n. s. 1. 14, 1915): 
"The beauty of Lutece shows that it is impossible to foretell what hybrids may 
produce and makes it reasonable to hope that by the use in this way of some of 
the new species. . . new hybrid races may be obtained of distinct value as garden 
plants." Under the name Lutece are frequently sold some of the less desirable 
S. Henryi forms. The name Lutece is a derivation from the old name for the 
city of Paris where the plant originated. According to Graesse (Orbis latinus, 
1861) the etymology is "Lutetia, Lutetia parisiorum, Parisii; Paris, st[adt] in 
Frankreich." 

Among the synonyms cited by Beissner, Schelle and Zabel for their S. villosa 
X Josikaea, is S. Bretschneideri X Josikaea var. Lutece Simon-Louis; this is mis- 
quoted by Lingelsheim (Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 94, 1920) as S. Bret- 
schneideri X Josikaea (S. eximia) var. Lutece. The garden form of S. Josikaea 



104 THE LILAC 

introduced by Froebel in 1899 under the name Eximia is correctly classified by 
Beissner, Schelle and Zabel. They make, so far as I know, no reference to a 5. 
eximia. For synonym S. Bretschneideri, see S. villosa, p. 86. 

Lutece is mentioned in "Standardized Plant Names" (486, 1923) without in- 
dication of its hybrid origin. The paragraph prefacing the list in which it appears 
is misleading and would indicate that it was a form of S. vulgaris. 

In the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum are many specimens which should 
be classified as belonging to this group of hybrids. The various names under which 
they have been determined go to prove their great similarity to S. villosa and 5. 
Josikaea, with both of which species, as well as with improved S. Josikaea forms 
they have at times been confused. The same confusion has existed in regard to 
living plants in the Arboretum and in private collections. 

A plant (no. 1 7,352 Am. Arb.), received as Lutece in 1907 from Mr. A. Hunnewell 
Wellesley, Massachusetts, is now an exceedingly handsome specimen in the Arnold 
Arboretum. It is broad, round-topped, and well filled out from base to summit, 
and produces annually a great number of showy flower-clusters which appear 
frequently from several pairs of lateral buds as well as from the terminal bud. An 
even handsomer plant, also thought to be Lutece, is growing in the garden of 
Mrs. Bayard Thayer, Lancaster, Massachusetts. One great advantage of these 
hybrids is their late blooming season which comes after the forms of the Common 
Lilac have faded. They lack, however, the fragrance of S. vulgaris and its forms. 

Mr. F. L. Skinner of Dropmore, Manitoba, Canada, wrote me on November 
18, 1925: "About 12 years ago I crossed S. villosa with 5. Josikaea; the resulting 
seedlings resemble S. villosa in foliage, but the flowers, though they vary consider- 
ably, are more or less intermediate between both parents. I have not propagated 
or distributed any of these hybrids." 

Writing in "The Garden" (lxxxvii. 301, 1923) Mr. Osborn of Kew tells us 
that "hybrids raised on the continent between this species [S. emodi Wallich] or 
S. villosa and the Common Lilac are interesting and will no doubt be heard from 
in the future, but the Great War checked their development and dissemination." 
In a letter of November 17, 1926, he replied to an inquiry made in regard to this 
cross: "The Syringa Emodi and other hybrid Lilacs we first obtained from V. 
Lemoine and Son . . . in 191 2. . . . We consider Syringa 'Lamartine' . . . the best 
of the hybrids we have grown. When sending plants ... I will include grafts 
of this hybrid Lilac . . . also one called 'Lutece.' On February 25, 1927, he kindly 
sent grafts of Lamartine, here classified as a form of 5. hyacinthiflora (S. 
oblata X S. vulgaris) and introduced by Lemoine in 191 1, and of Lutece, a form of 
the hybrid 5. Henryi Schneider introduced by the Simon-Louis firm in 1900, as 
well as of a plant called S. hybrida. In an accompanying letter he states that this 
latter plant was a cross between S. emodi and 5. vulgaris and was raised from seed 
received from Regel and Kesselring, Russia, in 1913. A plant of the same name 
appears in the "Hand-List of Trees and Shrubs . . . grown in the Royal Botanic 



SYRINGA HENRYI 105 

Gardens, Kew" (236, 1925) as "S. hybrida Hort. (S. Emodii X vtdgaris). Garden 
origin. 5. Emodii var. hybrida Hort." Specimens of the flowers and foliage of 
this 5. hybrida were received at the Arnold Arboretum in May, 1925. These 
show no 5. vtdgaris influence either in the flowers or in the foliage; moreover the 
clusters terminate leafy shoots and they therefore belong to the group of the Villosae. 
No characters of foliage, of individual flower, or of inflorescence, can be found 
differentiating these examples of S. hybrida from the hybrids 5. Henryi, and the 
plant undoubtedly belongs in that group. Confusion of the Lilacs S. villosa and 
S. emodi was, and is, not infrequent and the term "hybrida" was used by L. Henry 
in writing of his crosses, — he calls them S. Josikaea hybrida and S. Bretschneideri 
hybrida, — so that it was not amazing that such an error should occur in the propa- 
gation or distribution of these plants. I know of no successful cross between Lilacs 
of the two groups Vulgares and Villosae. 

An inquiry of Mr. Emile Lemoine in regard to crosses between Lilacs of these 
two groups brought me on August 21, 1927, the following reply: "Je n'ai jamais 
reussi de croisements entre les S. Vulgares et Villosae, quoique je les aie souvent 
tentes, mais je ne pretends pas que d'autres ne puissent pas y reussir." 

As noted under the hybrid S. Prestoniae, Miss Isabella Preston attempted to 
cross S. villosa ( 9 ) with S. vtdgaris ( 6 ) but was unsuccessful. 

Mr. Skinner, already quoted, wrote me on November 18, 1925: "During the 
past six years I have tried on every available occasion to cross 5. vtdgaris with 
S. villosa, but so far without success. On one occasion I did secure a few seeds 
but they failed to germinate." 

S. R. Duffy (Garden and Home Builder, May, 1927, 312) writes: "Just before 
the outbreak of the world war we were told of a new race of late flowering Lilacs 
to be sent out. These were hybrids between the villosa section and the vulgaris 
hybrids and between the members of the villosa section. This section includes 
Syringa villosa, emodi, bretschneideri [= S. villosa], and josikaea. . . . There 
seems to be some confusion as to whether the first three are distinct species or 
merely varieties of villosa. . . . The only one of these promised hybrids that we 
have listed in the United States, so far as I know, is Lutece, the parents being 
S. bretschneideri and josikaea. . . . Apparently the war stopped the work of propa- 
gating and disseminating these later flowered hybrids and they are something to 
which we may, perhaps, look forward." The "hybrids between the villosa section 
and the vulgaris hybrids" to which Mr. Duffy refers are presumably the same as 
those to which Mr. Osborn had reference and which he calls S. hybrida. 

In a letter dated August 21, 1927, Mr. Emile Lemoine writes: "J'ai quelques 
hybrides provenant du croisement du S. Henryi Lutece avec S. Wilsonii (Wilson 
1273) que vous nommez maintenant 5. tomentella je crois. lis ont le meme aspect, 
et le meme mode de vegetation et de floraison que les precedents [Mr. Lemoine 
refers to 5. Henryi Lutece, Eximia ( = S. Josikaea Eximia), H. Zabel ( = S. Josikaea 
H. Zabel)], et si je les mets un jour au commerce, ce sera sous la meme rubrique [S. 



106 THE LILAC 

Henryi], car ils fonnent, pratiquement du moins, un groupe assez homogene." 
See S. nanceiana for the statement of Mr. Lemoine's position in regard to retaining 
the name 5. Henryi (adopted by Schneider for the cross between S. villosa and 5". 
Josikaea) for a cross, from a garden point of view very similar in appearance, but 
between different parents (X S. Henryi Schneider X S. Sweginzowii Koehne and 
Lingelsheim) . 

Miss Isabella Preston (see S. Prestoniae) attempted to cross S. reflexa (9) 
with S. Henryi Lutece (6). Dr. W. T. Macoun, in an article noted under S. 
Prestoniae writes: "One plant, of which S. reflexa was the seed and S. lutece (a 
hybrid of 5. villosa) the pollen parent, shows more of the drooping panicles and 
pinkish color of S. reflexa." When visiting Ottawa in June, 1927, this cross could 
not be found. 



X SYRINGA NANCEIANA 

A hybrid between S. Henryi Schneider and S. Sweginzowii Koehne and 
Lingelsheim has recently been introduced by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, of 
Nancy, France, under the name S. Henryi Floreal. For reasons explained below 
I propose for this hybrid the following new name: 

X Syringa nanceiana (S. Henryi Schneider X S. Sweginzowii Koehne and Lingels- 
heim), new name. 

Syringa Henryi Floreal Lemoine, Cat. no. 199, 20 (1925-1926). 

The Lemoine catalogue, English edition, states: "This handsome variety [S. 
Henryi Floreal] is a hybrid from Syringa Henryi Lutece crossed with S. Sweginzowii 
superba. The whole shrub is covered with a quantity of light and ample panicles 
of flowers of a fair size, and of a pleasing shade of mauve lilac, very effective at a 
distance." 

In a letter of December 8, 1925, Mr. E. Lemoine wrote me: "J'ai fait en effet 
plusieurs croisements entre le Syringa Henryi Lutece et le S. Sweginzowii superba, 
d'une part, et le S. Wilsonii (Wilson no. 1273) que vous appelez maintenant S. 
tomentella, je crois, d'autre part. Un hybride obtenu du premier croisement a ete 
mis au commerce cet automne sous le nom de 5. Henryi Floreal. ... Le Syringa 
Sweginzowii superba etait cultive au Museum d'Histoire Naturelle de Paris sous le 
no. 5576, et n'y fleurissait pas. Nous en avons recu quelques rameaux en 1907 et 
lorsque l'arbuste a fleuri, nous avons remarque qu'il etait voisin du S. Sweginzowii 
que nous avons recu du feu Max von Sivers de Riga; mais plus beau et plus florifere. 
C'est une vari6te qu'il faut multiplier par voie vegetative, car les semis ne repro- 
duisent pas fidelement la variete." 

The hybrid S. Henryi Schneider was produced by crossing S. villosa Vahl and 
S. Josikaea Jacquin fil. This new hybrid of the Lemoine firm cannot correctly 
bear the same name since its parents are not the same. I have therefore adopted 
the name S. nanceiana because of the plant's origin in Mr. Lemoine's nursery at 
Nancy, France. Floreal is the type of this new hybrid. As stated later under 
5. Sweginzowii I do not believe that the plant introduced in 19 15 by the Lemoine 
firm as S. Sweginzowii superba differs from typical 5. Sweginzowii. 

Floreal was the name for the eighth month of the calendar of the first French 
Republic, — from April 20 to May 19; these dates are presumably applicable to 
the date of flowering of this Lilac, in France. 

In regard to the change of name here believed necessary I wrote to Mr. Emile 
Lemoine and received the following reply, dated August 21, 1927: "Syringa Henryi 

107 



108 THE LILAC 

Floreal. Je l'ai classe comme Henry i parce que j'ai trouve qu'au point de vue 
horticole, par sa vegetation, son aspect, sa floraison, il se rapprochait beaucoup du 
groupe des S. Henryi Lutece, Eximia [= S. Josikaea Eximia], H. Zabel [= S. 
Josikaea H. Zabel], et ne pouvait guere en etre separe par un nouveau nom specifique. 
Les catalogues d'horticulteurs n'ont pas la pretention d'etre des documents bota- 
niques, et je ne desire pas changer ce nom." No discourtesy to Mr. Lemoine's posi- 
tion in regard to his retention of the original combination of names is intended, 
and I wish to emphasize that Floreal should be retained as the horticultural name 
of this particular cross, while 5. nanceiana will stand as a group name for all 
hydrids beween S. Henryi and S. Sweginzowii. 

A plant of this hybrid (Arn. Arb. no. 19,274) is growing in the Arnold Arboretum 
and flowered sparingly in 1928. It was received from the Lemoine firm in Decem- 
ber, 1925. The following notes were made upon its winter-buds: oblong with acute 
apex, flower bud 5 /i6 in. long, scales reddish brown with dark margins, acute, 
keeled and forming a markedly four-sided bud, lustrous, glabrous. Leaf-scar 
much raised, shield-shaped, inconspicuous, medium size; bundle-trace crescent- 
shaped. In their form these buds resemble those of the parent S. Sweginzowii. 
The form of the flowers and flower-cluster is much like that of the parent 5. 
Sweginzowii but their color, containing considerable blue, indicates the parent 
■S. Henryi. The foliage appears to be close to S. Henryi although slightly smaller. 
This promises to be a valuable and distinct hybrid Lilac. 



Plate XLV 




SYRINGA PRESTONIAE "ISABELLA" 

(Preston no. 20-14-114) 

Flower cluster. June 21, 1927. 



Plate XLVI 




p 

o 

< 






<N 

O P 



o 



c 
o 



w « 

£ B 

< 
o 

to 

CO 



J- 



t/3 

3 



— 
O 



Plate XLVII 




w 

< 

O 
H 

<Ji 

3 

Oh 

<! 

O 



o 

6 

c 

o 






c 

3 



o 






X SYRINGA PRESTONIAE 

Hybrids between Syringa reflexa Schneider ( 6 ) and Syringa villosa Vahl ( 9 ) 
have been raised in Canada. They have been named in honor of Miss Isabella 
Preston, Specialist in Ornamental Gardening, Horticultural Division, Dominion 
of Canada Central Experimental Farm, Ottawa, the producer of this new race. 

X Syringa Prestoniae McKelvey in Horticulture, n. s. v. no. 15, 302, fig. (1927). 

Dr. W. T. Macoun in his "Report of the Dominion Horticulturist for the year 
1925" under the heading "Some results in cross-breeding ornamental plants at the 
Central Experimental Farm, Ottawa, Canada," writes: "There are not many flower- 
ing shrubs which are hardy in the colder sections of the country so it was decided 
to use the late blooming species of Syringa (Lilac) to try and get improved forms. 
S. villosa, the late blooming species of lilac frequently seen in shrubberies, is very 
hardy, so was chosen as the female parent, and 5. reflexa, a species not quite so 
hardy as S. villosa, with drooping panicles of rosy-pink flowers closely packed on 
the stem, as the male parent. This cross proved quite successful and about two 
hundred and fifty seedlings were obtained, a large proportion of which show some 
improvement on the parents. The panicles are large and freely produced and make 
the bushes one mass of bloom. The colour varies from very pale pink to pinkish 
lilac." 

In "Horticulture" (rv. no. 24, 532, fig., 1926) appears, over Miss Preston's 
signature, another early mention of this new race. In "The National Horticultural 
Magazine" (January, 1927, 27) she again writes: "In 1920, at the Central Experi- 
mental Farm, Ottawa, Canada, a start was made in breeding a new race of hardy 
lilacs. The late blooming hardy species 5. villosa was chosen as one parent, and 
this was crossed with -S*. reflexa, one of the new introductions from China, which 
has drooping panicles and rosy pink flowers closely packed on the stem. This 
cross proved successful and there are about two hundred and fifty seedlings growing. 
They show great variation, particularly in the size of inflorescence. A few are quite 
small but the majority are much larger than those of either parent. They branch 
freely and the bushes are one mass of bloom for a considerable period. The color 
varies in the different plants from pale pink to pinkish lilac. A number of seedlings 
of this cross showed yellow streaks on the leaves which our plant pathologist said 
was not caused by disease, but it was unsightly, as the pale colored part of the 
foliage shrivelled up early in the season. The plants in most cases were dwarfed 
also, so they were destroyed." 

1C9 



110 THE LILAC 

Miss Preston wrote me on November 14, 1925: "The crosses were all made in 
1920. I had 299 seedlings of S. villosa ( 2 ) X 5. reflexa ( 6 ) planted out in May 1922. 
A few bloomed in 1923 and over 60 had variegated leaves and were destroyed. 
In 1924 the majority bloomed and I think this year they all did so. The colour of 
the flowers varies from very pale to deep mauvish pink. None I think are so pink 
as S. reflexa. The plants are very floriferous and those with the loosely branched 
panicles are very effective in the garden. The objectionable odor of S. villosa has 
been eliminated in some of the hybrids and in none is it so pronounced as in the 
parent. . . ." 

On June 20 and 21, 1927, with Mr. Alfred Rehder, I went to see these plants 
when they were in full flower. The parents were examined and were found true to 
name. Specimens of each are now in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum. The 
seed parent, S. villosa, was the largest plant of this species which I have seen, — 
close to twenty feet tall and of equal breadth. Its great size is indicative of the 
fondness of some of this genus for a cold climate. The seedling offspring gave many 
indications of their hybrid origin. 

The majority of the plants appear to be profuse bloomers and are extremely 
showy. As noted by Miss Preston the flower clusters are variable in form. Some 
are long and narrow, suggesting Buddleia Davidi Franchet both in their form and 
in their horizontal or semi-pendulous habit of growth; this type of inflorescence is 
to be found not only predominating on certain plants, but occurring also on the 
lower half of other bushes where the greater part of the clusters are of quite a dif- 
ferent form, open and wide-spreading, and of an erect habit. Their form and semi- 
pendulous to pendulous habit of growth suggests the parent S. reflexa. On the 
greater number of plants the clusters are of large size, frequently a foot long, and 
terminate a six or eight inch leafy shoot. It is not unusual to find in addition to 
the normal terminal panicle lateral ones as well, these as a rule spreading at a wide 
angle to the branch upon which they are produced. The panicles have wide- 
spreading branchlets drooping as a rule for half their length; since the basal sub- 
divisions of these droop also, a cluster, extremely open and of distinct form is pro- 
duced. Here again the tendency to droop rather than to remain erect is derived 
from S. reflexa. 

When the flowers of these hybrids are compared with Mr. Ridgway's plates 
their color is found to contain a certain amount of blue, but, as is the case with those 
of the parent S. villosa, the general effect of the bloom in the open is pinkish rather 
than bluish. None of the plants show so much blue as is found in the S. Henryi 
hybrids, which, in this respect, indicate their 5. Josikaea parentage. The color 
of S. villosa appears to have been deepened by the influence of S. reflexa. As is 
the case with all colored Lilacs the flowers of these 5. Prestoniae hybrids fade almost 
white. Most of the plants show the rhachis, pedicel and calyx tinged with bronze. 

The form of the individual flower varies on the different seedlings to a marked 
degree. The corolla-tube, so far as I observed, is nearer funnelform, as in S. 



SYRINGA PRESTONIAE 111 

reflexa, than cylindric, as in S. villosa. In certain cases the funnel is slender, in 
others stout with wide throat. The corolla-lobes vary from narrow to broad; 
for the most part they are cucullate with a pronounced hook; in some instances 
they are held more erect than in either parent, but for the most part they expand 
to a right angle with the corolla-tube. The flowers fall from the cluster as they 
fade. The anthers, both in size and in position, resemble those of 5. villosa. It may 
be said that among the many seedlings are to be found flowers approaching those of 
each parent. 

The foliage resembles that of 5. villosa, — dark green and glabrous above, 
paler and varying in amount of pubescence beneath; in form, size and texture it 
also approaches this parent. The bark is noticeably lenticellate. 

All plants appear to be vigorous growers, forming round-topped, well-foliaged 
bushes. Now about seven years old they vary in height from 5 to 8 ft. The fragrance 
of the flowers suggests that of S. villosa although sometimes less pronounced. 

Evidences of hybrid origin are to be found in the occurrence of occasional 
fasciate branchlets, and in the variation of the number of corolla-lobes, flowers 
often producing only three, or frequently an abnormally large number, sometimes 
as many as eight or nine. In such flowers the stamens also vary from the normal in 
number. 

Because of the variable character of these hybrid seedlings, similar in general 
effect but varying individually in form of flower and of cluster, it is obvious that any 
attempt to distinguish and name a great number of individual plants would merely 
result in confusion. Two were, however, chosen, representing remarkably fine 
examples of the extremes found in the group. 

I have chosen as type of these hybrids the form (Preston no. 20-14-114) to 
which I have given Miss Preston's christian name: 

Isabella. 

See Plate xxxvm. 

Here the individual flower is small in size, V12 in. long, with a corolla J4 in. in di- 
ameter. The corolla-tube is slender, funnelform. The corolla-lobes are small, pointed 
at the apex, cucullate, with a minute hook; they expand to a right angle with the corolla- 
tube. The anthers are the same size as those of S. villosa and inserted in the same posi- 
tion in the corolla- tube ; they are visible in the expanded flower but inconspicuous. Their 
color is in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Light Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) ; when expanded 
Pale Vinaceous-Lilac without, white with an eye of Pale Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) within. 
The clusters are frequently a foot long and of equal breadth at their base ; they terminate 
leafy shoots often 9 in. long. The basal subdivisions of the inflorescence are not 
infrequently 8 in. long, and droop for half their length while the secondary basal 
subdivisions show the same tendency. Except near the top of the cluster all the subdivi- 
sions are wide-spreading. For the most part the clusters appear from terminal buds, 
are held erect and are extremely large and showy. The rhachis, pedicel and 
calyx are green, as in S. villosa, lacking the bronze color found in the form W. T. 



112 THE LILAC 

Macoun and others. The foliage is bright green and glabrous above, pubescent and 
paler beneath. The winter-buds are ovoid with acute apex, the flower bud 7 /i 6 in. 
long more or less, the scales reddish brown with yellower brown margins, the lower pair 
acute, and conspicuously keeled, the upper pairs rounded, scarcely keeled, all glabrous 
or minutely puberulous near margins, slightly lustrous, the margins very broken. The 
leaf-scar much raised, shallow shield- shaped, not conspicuous, medium size; the bundle- 
trace slightly curved. The capsule is oblong, obtuse, non-verrucose, %r~% in. long, 
each valve ending in a short, slender tip. 

The second of these forms (Preston no. 2014-51), suggesting in form of flower 
and of inflorescence the pollen parent 5. reflexa, I have called : 

W. T. Macoun. 
See Plate xxxix. 

The name was chosen as a tribute to the Dominion Horticulturist in whose depart- 
ment Miss Preston's work was carried on. 

In this form the individual flower is large, % i n - l° n g> with stout, funnelform corolla- 
tube and a wide throat. The corolla-lobes are broad, acute at apex, cucullate, with a 
short hook. They are held erect, never expanding to a right angle with the corolla- 
tube. The anthers are large, 3 /i 6 in. long, or about the size of those of S. villosa, and are 
inserted just below the mouth. They are visible in the expanded flower but not conspicu- 
ous because of the position of the corolla-lobes. The color of the flowers is in bud Vinace- 
ous-Purple turning to Tourmaline Pink to Laelia Pink (xxxvin.) ; when expanded, the 
tube Laelia Pink, the lobes Pale Laelia Pink without, white with shadings of Pale Laelia 
Pink (xxxvui.) within. The clusters, frequently 9 in. long and 7 in. broad, are produced 
on leafy shoots 7 to 8 in. long. Their basal subdivisions are often 5 in. long. The 
clusters taper from a broad base to a narrow top and droop slightly for a part of their 
length. They appear frequently in threes, from one terminal and two opposite lateral 
buds on the same branchlet; the rhachis, pedicel and calyx are tinged Dark Indian 
Red (xxvu.); the rhachis is slightly puberulous, but not the calyx or pedicel. The 
winter-buds are ovoid with acute apex, the flower bud 7 /i 6 in. long more or less, the 
scales reddish brown with yellower brown margins, acute or rounded, the lower pair 
conspicuously keeled, the upper pairs less so, glabrous or minutely puberulous, slightly 
lustrous. The leaf-scar slightly raised, shallow shield-shaped, inconspicuous, medium 
size ; the bundle-trace only slightly curved. The capsule is oblong, obtuse, non-verrucose, 
% in. long, each valve ending in a short, slender tip. 

In the numbers used by Miss Preston the first figures stand for the year in which the 
cross was made, the second for the cross, and the final numbers for the individual plant. 

Mr. F. L. Skinner of Dropmore, Manitoba, Canada, wrote me on November 18, 1925, 
that he had produced a similar cross: "My first attempt to cross 5. villosa with S. reflexa 
was in 1920, but I had no success until 1922. In that year with pollen from the Arboretum 
I was quite successful and now have over 70 two year old seedlings of this cross." On 
July 20, 1927 he again wrote: "... one of my hybrids of this race produced a few 
flowers this year and I expect quite a number of them to flower next year." 

Miss Preston also attempted to cross S. villosa ( $ ) with S. vulgaris ( 6 ). Dr. 



SYRINGA PRESTONIAE 113 

i 

Macoun in the article already cited writes: "S. villosa X 6". vulgaris makes a smaller 

shrub than the other crosses and has leaves that show its hybrid origin. The 
panicles are small and the flower purplish. This is more curious than beautiful 
but may be useful for further breeding work." We examined in June, 1927, the 
seedlings raised and could find no trace of 6". vulgaris parentage. 

Miss Preston also pollinized S. villosa with 5. chinensis. Of this cross Dr. 
Macoun writes: "S. villosa X S. chinensis (Rothomagensis) are not so ornamental 
as the parents and will be discarded." Again the pollen parent was not traceable 
in the offspring. The latter cross was noted by Miss Preston in "The National 
Horticultural Magazine" (January, 1927, 27). 

I know of no successful cross between Lilacs of the groups Villosae and Vulgares. 



Plate XLVIII 



SYRINGA TOMENTELLA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6625) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate XLIX 




SYRINGA TOMENTELLA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6625-6) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. May 3, 1926. 



Plate L 




SYRINGA TOMENTELLA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6626) 

Flower cluster. June 16, 1924. 



Plate LI 




w 

H 

w 
o 



o 



2 a 






0) 

PI 









>* o3 



a; 



< £ 











■*f 








< 






-J 


o 


^O 


|x| 
H 


o 

e 


rj 


w 


H 


3 


s 




3 


>— » 


H 


o 


)-. 


< 






rt 


< 


o 


>— < 

2 


O 


• i— ( 


>< 


c 


<-> 


CO 




c 



(^ 



Plate LIII 





L_ 



SYRINGA TOMENTELLA 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 6625) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked August, 1924. 



Plate LIV 






to 




<J 


<N 


. 


J 


vO 


U-, 


I-J 


VO 


oa 


w 

H 


6 


H 


fe 


^ 


s-T 


W 





1) 


S 


3 


E 


o 


0) 


<u 


H 


o 


> 

o 


<3 




£ 


O 


< 




S 


, I 




i— i 


' W 


'/■ 


« 


"o 


IH 


>-< 


c 


oj 


CO 


< 


PQ 



SYRINGA TOMENTELLA 

Syringa tomentella Bureau and Franchet in Jour. Botanique, v. 103 (April 1), 160 
(May 16) (1891). — Carriere and Andre in Rev. Hort. 1891, 219. — Garden and Forest, 
rv. 264 (1891), as S. tomentilla. — Bonvalot, De Paris au Tonkin a travers le Tibet in- 
connu, 474 (1892). — Mouillefert, Traite Arb. Arbris. 11. 1002, footnote (1) (1892-1898). — 
Bretschneider, Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 914 (1898). — Bois in Jour. Soc. 
Nat. Hort. France, ser. 4, 1. 226 (1900); Nouvelles Especes d'Arbres et d'Arbrisseaux 
du Yunnan et du Su-tchuen, reprint, 43 (1900). — L. Henry in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, 
ser. 4, n. 755 (1901). — Schneider in Wien. 111. Gartenz. xxvni. 101 (1903), as S. tanen- 
tella; in Engler, Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 82, p. 89 (1905), under S. emodi Wallich; 
in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. ix. 81 (1910); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 227, 230 
(191 1); HI. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 782, figs. 489 a, 490 i-k (191 1); n. 1064 (191 2); in 
Sargent, PI. Wilson. 1. 300 (1912); in. 433 (1917); in Gartenschonheit, vm. 144, fig. (p. 
142) (1927). — M. Smith in Hemsley in Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxxvi. 524 (Ind. Fl. 
Sin. in.) (1903-1905). — Koehne in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 19, 113, fig. 8 B 
a-c (1910), excluding synonym 5. velutina Komarov; in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. xi. 529, 
fig. b a-e (1913) (extract from Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 19, 1. c). — Wilson, Natu- 
ralist in western China, 1. 181 (1913); in Gard. Mag. xxin. 154 (1916); Aristocrats of the 
Garden, 223 (1917). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. 1. 31 (1915); 111. 42 (1917); 
iv. 26 (1918); v. 27 (1919); vm. 23 (1922). — Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 
25, 172 (1916). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vr. 3302 (1917); Man. Cult. 
Trees and Shrubs, 753 (1927). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 81 
(1920). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 404 (1922). — 
A. 0[sborn] in Garden, lxxxvii. 302 (1923). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. 
PI. Names, 485 (1923). — Dunbar in Florists Exch. September 22, 1923, 830. — Stipp in 
Gartenwelt, xxvni. 413, fig. 4 (1924); in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. XL. 399, fig. iv. 
(1925); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 37, 147, fig. (1926). — Stares, Cerines 
{Syringa L.), 25 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

S\yringa] velutina Bureau and Franchet according to Franchet in Rev. Hort. 1891, 308 
(July 16), 333 (August 1); in Garden, xl. 157 (August 15), 202 (August 29) (1891). — 
L. Henry in Jardin, ix. 76 (1895); i n J our - Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, n. 755 (1901). — 
Schneider in Wien. 111. Gartenz. xxviii. 101 (1903). — M. Smith in Hemsley in 
Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxxvi. 524 (Ind. Fl. Sin. m.) (1903-1905). — Niemetz in 
Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 17, 191 (1908). — Not Komarov. 

S\yringa] Emodi var. vilosissima Schneider in Wien. 111. Gartenz. xxviii. 107 (1903). 

S\yringa] Emodi var. pilosissima Schneider in Engler, Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 82, 
p. 89 (1905), as a synonym. 

Syringa Rehderiana Schneider in Sargent, PL Wilson. 1. 299 (191 2); m. 433 (191 7), 
under 5. Wilsonii Schneider; 111. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 1064, fig. 628 a (1912). — 
Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3302 (1917). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold 

115 



116 THE LILAC 

Arb. n. s. IV. 25 (1918). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 83 
(1920). — Stares, Cerines {Syringa L.), 4> 25 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 
11. (1926). 

Syringa Wilsonii Schneider in Sargent, PI. Wilson. 1. 300 (1912); in. 433 (1917); 111. 
Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 1064 (1912). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 19, April 25 
(1912). — Gamier in Rev. Hort. 1913, 118. — Wilson, Naturalist in western China, 
1. 203 (1913). — Hesse in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 128 (1916). — Rehder 
in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3302 (1917). — Bean in Bot. Mag. cxliii. t. 8739 
(1917). — Lingelsheim'in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 8^ (1920). — Garden, 
lxxxiv. 35, fig. (1920). — A. 0[sborn] in Garden, lxxxvii. 51, fig. (1923). — Olm- 
sted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923). — Gartenwelt, xxviii. 
278 (1924). — Mottet, Arb. Arbust. Orn. 341, t. 7,3 (1925). — Stipp in Moller's 
Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xl. 399 (1925); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 37, 147 
(1926). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.) , 4, 25 (1926); reprinted from Darzkopibas, 
n. (1926). 

Syringa alborosea N. E. Brown in Kew Bull. Misc. Inform, xxvn. no. 5, 187 (1914). — 
Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. i-n. 83 (1920). 

Syringa Adamiana Balfour fil. and W. W. Smith in Notes Bot. Gard. Edinburgh, ix. 131 
(1916). 

S[yringa] tomentosa Gartenwelt, xxviii. 278 (1924). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 
4 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

Syringa tomentella var. Rehderiana Rehder in Jour. Arnold Arb. vn. 34 (1926); Man. 
Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 753 (1927). 

A shrub up to 15 ft. tall; branches upright or arching, slender, gray, smooth, lenticel- 
late; branchlets yellow-green or brown, sometimes quadrangular, glabrous or pubescent, 
lenticellate. Winter-buds oblong with acuminate apex, flower bud J^ in. long more or 
less, scales reddish brown with dark brown margins, acuminate, glabrous or with puberu- 
lous margins, keeled and forming a four-sided bud. Leaf-scar much raised, shallow 
shield-shaped, inconspicuous, small; bundle-trace only slightly curved. Leaves elliptic 
to oblong-lanceolate, 1-7 in. long, ^-3 in. broad, acute or acuminate, base cuneate, 
ciliolate, yellow-green, glabrous or slightly pubescent or sparingly pilose above, pale, 
pilose or pubescent beneath; midrib conspicuous; petiole \i-Yi in. long, stout or slender, 
glabrous or pubescent or pilose near the juncture with leaf. Inflorescence borne on 
leafy or non-leafy shoots, normally terminal but frequently lateral, upright, 4-10 in. long, 
2-5 in. broad; rhachis sparingly or densely puberulent, sometimes glabrous, tinged 
Dark Indian Red (xxvn.), lenticellate; pedicel short, glabrous or puberulent, tinged 
like rhachis; calyx glabrous or puberulent, with short acute teeth, tinged like rhachis; 
corolla- tube slightly widened above the middle, 5 /i 2 - 7 /i2 in. long; corolla-lobes spread- 
ing at right angles to corolla-tube, pointed, rarely cucullate; corolla 1 U~ b /u in. in di- 
ameter; color in bud Rhodonite Pink (xxxviii.) tinged on lobes Olive-Buff (xl.) to Pale 
Rhodonite Pink (xxxviii.); when expanded Rhodonite Pink to Pale Rhodonite Pink 
fading to white on corolla-lobes without, white tinged near throat Rhodonite Pink 
(xxxviii.) within; anthers Primrose Yellow (xxx.), J/g in. long, inserted just below the 
mouth of corolla-tube. Capsule oblong, dark brown, smooth, sometimes sparingly 
lenticellate, V12 in. long, acuminate or acute. (The notes on the color of the flowers 
were taken from a plant (no. 6627) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 



SYRINGA TOMENTELLA 117 

Habitat: China: provinces of Szechuan; Yunnan. 

Syringa tomentella was first described by Edouard Bureau and Adrien Franchet 
in "Plantes Nouvelles du Thibet et de la Chine occidentale receuillies pendant 
le voyage de M. Bonvalot et du Prince Henri d'Orleans en 1890" which was pub- 
lished in 1891 in the "Journal de Botanique." The two type specimens, both of 
flowering branches, collected by these travelers, are in the herbarium of the Museum 
of Natural History, Paris, and came from the province of Szechuan, China, "entre 
Ta-tsien-lou et la frontiere du Yunnan." According to Bretschneider (Hist. 
Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 912, 1898) Bonvalot and Prince Henri d'Orleans left 
Ta tsien lu on July 13, 1890, and traveled south through Fu lin and Ning yuan. 
The locality is given as Ta tsien lu in Bonvalot's account of his travels with Prince 
Henri d'Orleans (De Paris au Tonkin a travers le Tibet inconnu, 474, 1892). 

The original description, translated from the Latin, reads: "Shrub; branches 
gray, sparingly lenticellate, above short-hispid; leaves ovate-lanceolate, acuminate, 
narrowing into a hispid slender petiole, above everywhere pubescent with short 
sparse hairs, beneath gray- velvety; panicle thyrsoid, ovate, large, with hispid 
branchlets; the short pedicels and the calyx finely villose; the calyx campanulate with 
truncate mouth, with almost inconspicuous teeth; corolla slightly expanding from 
the base to the mouth, with lobes 4 times shorter than the tube, lanceolate, sub- 
acute, spreading; capsule. . . . Petiole 10-15 mm - l° n g> li mD 4 - 7 cm - l° n g> 2 5~3° 
mm. broad; pedicels 1-2 mm.; corolla 15 mm. long." 

No new material was described until E. H. Wilson collecting for the Arnold 
Arboretum in 1908 gathered specimens which in 191 2 were determined by Schneider 
as 5. tomentella. These specimens, now in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum 
were gathered in western Szechuan. One (no. 2584) collected on June 24, at Pan 
Ian shan, west of Kuan hsien, at an altitude of 12,000 ft., is described as a bush 
4-10 ft., with rose-pink flowers, growing in thickets; another (no. 1237b), collected 
in July, north of Ta tsien lu, was taken from a bush 12-15 &■ tall, growing at an 
altitude of 10,000 ft., with white or pink flowers. A fruiting specimen (no. 4408) 
was collected in the same locality in October, 1910, from a bush 10-15 ft. tall, 
growing in thickets. 

The Syringa velutina mentioned by Franchet in 1891 as having been described 
by Bureau and Franchet is probably merely a misnomer for the species S. tomentella 
which these authors had described a few months earlier in the same year. The name 
is handed on by L. Henry in "Le Jardin" for 1895 wno mentions this S. velutina, 
without citing the author of the name, among Lilacs not yet introduced into 
cultivation; later (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 11. 755, 1901) he lists as distinct 
species 5. tomentella Bureau and Franchet and S. velutina Bureau and Franchet as 
appearing in "Pl[antes] Nouv[elles] du Thibet." Miss M. Smith (Hemsley, Ind. 
Fl. Sin. in.) also mentions both in the "List of the Genera and Species discovered 
in China since the publication of . . . the 'Enumeration'. . . ." The S. velutina 
mentioned by Schneider (Wien. 111. Gartenz., 1. c.) is the same. The S. velutina 



118 THE LILAC 

Komarov, which Niemetz states was introduced into trade by Simon-Louis freres, 
is undoubtedly S. velutina Bureau and Franchet, or S. tomentella, for Niemetz 
mentions its similarity to S. Emodi rosea [=S. villosa], and to S. Josikaea rosea 
[see S. Josikaea rosea] to both of which S. tomentella is more closely related than 
is the true S. velutina of Komarov. Koehne gives as a synonym for S. tomentella, 
S. velutina of Komarov, but he is undoubtedly confused in regard to this plant 
and the 5. velutina Bureau and Franchet; he is referring to the latter when he 
states that according to Niemetz the plant was introduced by Simon-Louis freres, 
and to the true S. velutina of Komarov when he states that it was in cultivation in 
the arboretum of M. von Sivers at Roemershof, Russia. With the above exceptions 
the S. velutina of Bureau and Franchet, so far as I know, is everywhere given as a 
synonym of S. tomentella. 

Schneider for a time considered this species to be merely an extremely pilose 
variety of S. emodi Wallich, calling it (Wien. 111. Gartenz., 1. c.) S. Emodi var. 
vilosissima. He later cites this name as a synonym of S. tomentella but in the form 
S. Emodi var. pilosissima showing that the form in which the name had earlier 
appeared was an error in printing which he had presumably overlooked. Other 
misspellings appear in this article of Schneider's in the "Wiener Illustrierte 
Garten-Zeitung," — for example S. tomentella, when first mentioned, is spelt S. 
tanentella. 

Schneider based his species S. Rehderiana Schneider, which he later suggests 
may be only a variety of S. tomentella, on a specimen (no. 1273 a) now in the Arnold 
Arboretum which was collected by Wilson in July, 1908, at Ta tsien lu in western 
Szechuan. Schneider writes: "This seems to be an extremely beautiful shrub, 
most nearly related to S. tomentella Franchet, but the dense pubescence of the 
branches and the very short petioled broad elliptic leaves distinguish S. Rehder- 
iana at once from the allied species." The shape of the leaf and the short petiole 
I have found also present in the specimens considered by Schneider to be S. tomen- 
tella; the pubescence on the branchlets is pronounced, but this character is extremely 
variable in the Lilacs of this group and I here include the pubescent in the typical 
form. Rehder retains Rehderiana as a variety of 5. tomentella. 

S. Wilsonii Schneider, which Schneider himself later reduced to S. tomentella, was 
described from specimens (no. 1273) in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum. 
They were collected by Wilson at Ta tsien lu; two, dated June, 1908, are of flowers, 
and were taken from a bush 6-20 ft. tall; their color is noted as white or lilac; 
another, dated October, 1908, is of fruit, and a third, dated September, 1908, 
shows a portion of the bark. It is stated that the bush grew in thickets at an altitude 
of 9000 to 10,000 ft. It was characterized by the presence of pubescence only on 
the veins beneath, by a nearly glabrous inflorescence and calyx. Here again and 
for the reason mentioned under the synonym 5. Rehderiana I have included this in 
the typical form. The name S. Wilsonii was much used in England, Mr. A. 
Osborn writing in "The Garden" for 1923: "S. tomentella is at present better known 



SYRINGA TOMENTELLA 119 

in British gardens as S. Wilsoni. Dried wild specimens showed S. tomentella to 
have a pubescent undersurface to the leaves and inflorescence, as distinct from the 
slightly hairy S. Wilsoni, but under cultivation these differences do not hold good." 
In nursery catalogues of the United States this species is sometimes listed as S. 
Wilsonii. Mr. E. Lemoine wrote me on July i, 1925 : "D'apres les premiers tomes 
parus de Plantae Wilsonianae, le Syr. Wilson no. 1273 avait ete appele S. Wilsoni, 
ce nom a ete change plus tard en S. tomentella. J'ai toujours conserve le premier 
nom. Car j'ai recu autrefois de M. Max von Sivers, de Riga, un Syringa tomentella, 
tr&s distinct, et qui n'a jamais pu fleurir convenablement ici; les boutons a fleurs, 
tres precoces, etaient regulierement geles tous les ans. J'ai supprime cette plante." 
This plant was apparently not S. tomentella Bureau and Franchet. 

S. alborosea N. E. Brown was, according to the author of the name, "Described 
from a living plant raised by Messrs. J. Veitch and Sons from seed collected by 
E. H. Wilson in China, and presented by them to Kew in 1913, where it flowered in 
June, 1914." Brown relates it to S. Rehderiana but states that it differs in its 
glabrous branches, in its leaves green beneath, in its somewhat small and loose 
inflorescence, and in its calyx distinctly toothed. A type specimen is in the 
herbarium of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, and bears the number 1739 under 
which Wilson's seed was received by Messrs. Veitch in 1905; Wilson, according to 
his field book, gathered this seed in the mountains around Ta tsien lu in October, 
1904. It was therefore in 1905 that S. tomentella was introduced into cultivation. 
Lingelsheim retains S. alborosea as a distinct species, noting that he has not seen 
the specimen, but most authors at the present time consider it to be identical with 
S. tomentella. 

S. Adamiana Balfour fill, and W. W. Smith was described in 1916 from a plant 
raised from seed collected by C. M. Watson, without date, near Ta tsien lu and 
cultivated in the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh. The type specimens taken 
from this garden plant are in the herbarium at Edinburgh and one of them, through 
the courtesy of the Regius Keeper, was forwarded to the Arnold Arboretum for 
examination; it proved to be S. tomentella. A footnote to the description of 5. 
Adamiana states: "By the specific name it is desired to hold in memory Private 
Thomas Adam, 2nd Scots Guards, a gardener of the staff of the Royal Botanic 
Garden, Edinburgh, who fell in action in Flanders on 16th May 1915." 

The S. tomentosa, mentioned in "Die Gartenwelt," is presumably merely a 
misnomer for S. tomentella, as is that of Stares; the latter cites the name correctly 
in the text. 

According to Lingelsheim the Forrest specimens (nos. 2294 and 2636) referred 
by Diels (Notes Bot. Gard. Edinburgh, vn. no. 32, 116, 149, 191 2) to S. yunnanensis 
Franchet, and which I have not seen, are closely related to S. tomentella. 

In the Arnold Arboretum herbarium are two sheets (no. 22,309), both of fruit 
and foliage, which were collected in September, 1922, by George Forrest on the 
Chienchuan-Mekong Divide, northwestern Yunnan, at an altitude of 11,000 ft. 



120 THE LILAC 

This has been identified with S. tomentella and the range of the plant therefore 
extends into Yunnan. The specimen is noted as "Syringa sp. aff. reflexa." 

W. J. Bean writes that S. Wilsonii [=S. tomentella] was collected by A. E. 
Pratt in western Szechuan about twenty years earlier than the Wilson collections 
of 1908 and at about the same elevations, 8000-10,500 ft. The material for his 
plate in the "Botanical Magazine" was taken from a plant presented to Kew in 
1910 by Professor Sargent. According to Bretschneider (Hist. Europ . Bot. Discov. 
China, 804, 1898) Pratt collected chiefly around Ta tsien lu, in the years 1889 and 
1890, and at elevations ranging from 9000 to 13,500 feet. On June 24, 1890, he 
met the travelers Prince Henri d'Orleans and Bonvalot at Ta tsien lu and was 
entrusted with their collections which he took out with him to Shanghai. Pratt's 
botanical specimens were presented to the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Two 
specimens (nos. 185 and 224) collected by Pratt are in the Gray Herbarium. Both 
came from western Szechuan and the Tibetan frontier, "chiefly near Tachienlu" 
and grew at 9000-13,500 ft. elevation. 

The firm of V. Lemoine et fils, of Nancy, offered S. tomentella for sale in France 
under the name 5. Wilsonii Schneider (Cat. no. 182, 6, 1912). Lemoine's plants 
were raised from Wilson's no 1273. 

A plant of S. tomentella (no. 6625 Arn. Arb.) was first received at the Arnold 
Arboretum in November, 1907, from Messrs. James Veitch and Sons, as Syringa 
no. 1739 Wilson, from the mountains of Ta tsien lu. 

Wilson writes in his "Aristocrats of the Garden": "I saw this plant in flower for 
the first time on July 9, 1908, on the frontiers of eastern Tibet at an altitude of 
nine thousand feet, and I thought then that I had never before seen such a handsome 
species of Lilac. It had foot-high, broad panicles of pink to rosy lilac colored 
flowers and on other bushes they were white. The plants were from eight to fifteen 
feet high, much-branched yet compact in habit, and the wealth of flower clusters 
made it conspicuous from afar." 

Growing as a cultivated plant in the Arnold Arboretum 5. tomentella quite 
justifies Mr. Wilson's description. From a narrow base it spreads above into a 
broad, round-topped shrub about fifteen feet tall and of equal breadth, with many 
well-f oliaged branchlets ; each year it is covered about mid- June with a great number 
of showy flower clusters whose beauty is accentuated by the contrast between the 
dark stalks of the inflorescence and the pale pink flowers. These clusters are long, 
narrow and interrupted, or occasionally broad near their base with spreading sub- 
divisions. The individual flower is symmetrically formed, in color a pale pink 
fading to white, and in its open throat the yellow anthers are clearly visible. The 
flowers fall as they fade, leaving an always fresh cluster; unfortunately they lack 
the fragrance of the Common Lilac. The leaves unfold late in the spring and are, 
on most plants, retained until well into the autumn. One of the most characteristic 
features of this Lilac is its smooth pale gray bark marked with dark lenticels. In 
the Arnold Arboretum, where several plants of this species are now growing, it has 



SYRINGA TOMENTELLA 121 

proved entirely hardy. It has the advantage of flowering late, after the Common 
Lilac and its forms have faded and at about the same time as 5. villosa Vahl. 

An unsigned article in "The Garden" for 1920 notes its value in England for 
city gardens: ". . . Its value as a town shrub was abundantly demonstrated 
during the summer of 191 9, a specimen growing and flowering freely in a Camber- 
well villa front garden. Seeds ripen in this country." What is probably the 
same Camberwell plant is mentioned by A. O [shorn] in an article in the same period- 
ical for 1923; he also mentions its value as a town shrub. 

S. tomentella is nearly related to S. villosa Vahl and to S. Sweginzowii Koehne 
and Lingelsheim. In general appearance it is less stiff and sturdy than the former, 
and slightly less delicate and slender than the latter. 

Bureau and Franchet noted, when first describing S. tomentella, that it had 
considerable affinity to S. pubescens Turczaninov: "Espece tres florifere; ayant 
beaucoup d'affinites avec le S. pubescens Turcz. (S. villosa Decaisne, not Vahl); 
elle en differe par ses feuilles plus longues et relativement plus etroites, par sa 
pubescence plus abondante et plus serree, surtout en dessous, ou elle rend les feuilles 
veloutees, par son calice tronque au sommet et dont les dents sont a peine visibles; 
elles sont triangulares dans le 5. pubescens." The two species belong however to 
different groups of Lilacs, — the flower clusters of S. pubescens appearing from 
lateral buds, on non-leafy shoots, while those of S. tomentella appear from terminal 
buds, on leafy shoots; moreover the anthers of 5. tomentella are yellow while those 
of S. pubescens are bluish. 

Nash (Jour. N. Y. Bot. Gard. xx. 234, 1919) calls S. tomentella the Little Hairy 
Lilac, and 6". Wilsonii, Wilson's Lilac. Felty Lilac has been adopted as approved 
common name by "Standardized Plant Names"; for S. Wilsonii, which they still 
retain as a species, they adopt the approved common name of Wilson Lilac. Ac- 
cording to the present classification the latter name should be dropped. 

In a letter dated August 21, 1927, Mr. Emile Lemoine writes: "J'ai quelques 
hybrides provenant du croisement du 5. Henryi Lutece avec 5". Wilsonii (Wilson 
1273) que vous nommez maintenant S. tomentella je crois. lis ont le meme aspect, 
et le meme mode de vegetation et de floraison que les precedents [Mr. Lemoine 
refers to S. Henryi Lutece, Eximia ( = S. Josikaea Eximia), H. Zabel ( = S. Josikaea 
H. Zabel)], et si je les mets un jour au commerce, ce sera sous la meme rubrique 
[S. Henryi], car ils forment, pratiquement du moins, un groupe assez homogene." 
See S. nanceiana for the statement of Mr. Lemoine's position in regard to the 
retention of the name S. Henryi. 



Plate LV 




SYRINGA SWEGINZOWII 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,360) 

Winter buds, enlarged. January, 1925. 



Plate LYI 





SYRINGA SWEGINZOWII 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,361) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. May 12, 1026. 



Plate LVII 




o 

O 
W 

en 

< 
O 



CO 



C 

3 






(U 



V 
■r. 

3 









o 

if} 



i 



Plate LVIIT 









o 




I-* 


vO 


O 


t-H 


PO 


HH 


£ 


r^ 




O 


HH 


t^. 


N 




M 




o 
c 


3 


O 


r- 


3 


w 


c 

3 
1- 


t— > 


CO 


>-I 




o 


4) 


<: 


Xi 


* 


S5 


1-1 

< 


O 


i— i 


"O 


c 


Pi 


o 
c 


• ^H 


JH 


-t-> 


CO 


e 




< 


c3 






S 



Plate LIX 




SYRINGA SWEGINZOWII 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,360) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked August, 1924. 




SYRINGA SWEGINZOWII 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,361) 

Bark. November, 1925. 



SYRINGA SWEGINZOWII 

Syringa Sweginzowii Koehne and Lingelsheim in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. vm. 9 (1910). — 
Koehne in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 19, 112, fig. 8 A a-e (1910) (fig. reprinted 
in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. xi. 529, fig. 1 a a-e, 1913). — Schneider, HI. Handb. Laubholzk. 
11. 780, figs. 487 a-c, 490 a-d (191 1); 11. 1063 (191 2); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 
20, 227, 230 (191 1); in Sargent, PI. Wilson. 1. 301 (191 2); 111. 433 (1917); in Silva Tarou- 
ca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913); in Gartenschonheit, vm. 144, fig. (1927). — 
Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 59, June 18 (1914); n. s. 1. 36 (1915); iv. 25, 26 (1918); 
v. 27 (1919); vi. 34, 52 (1920); vm. 23 (1922). — Gard. Chron. ser. 3, lvh. 345, fig. 117 
(1915). — Bois and Grignan in Rev. Hort. 1915, 562. — Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxiii. 155 
(1916); Aristocrats of the Garden, 225 (1917). — Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. 
no. 25, 173 (1916). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3302 (1917); Man. Cult. 
Trees and Shrubs, 752 (1927). — Gard. Chron. ser. 3, lxiv. 27, (1918). — Kache in Mitt. 
Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 28, 249 (1919). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 
i-n. 81 (1920). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 405 
(1922). — Dunbar in Florists Exch. September 22, 1923, 830. — Olmsted, Coville and 
Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923). — Gartenwelt, xxviii. 278 (1924). — Stipp in 
Gartenwelt, xxviii. 411, fig. 3 (1924); in M oiler's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xl. 399, fig. 11. 
(1925); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 37, 146, t. 19 (1926). — Mottet, Arb. Arbust. 
Orn. 340 (1925). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 4, 23 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 
11. (1926) 

S[yringa\ pubescens Hort. according to Schneider in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 

20, 230 (191 1), as a synonym. 
Syringa tetanoloba Schneider in Sargent, PI. Wilson, 1. 299 (191 2); 111. Handb. Laubholzk. 

11. 1063 (1912). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 82 (1920). 
Syringa Sweginzowii superba Lemoine, Cat. no. 189, 23 (1925). — Gard. Chron. ser. 3, 

lxiv. 27, fig. n (1918). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 488 

(1923), as a synonym. — Rehder, Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 752 (1927). 

A broad shrub up to 15 ft. tall; branches upright, slender, gray-brown, glabrous, 
lenticellate ; branchlets numerous, sometimes quadrangular, lenticellate, when young 
sometimes pubescent and tinged Hay's Maroon (xin.). Winter-buds oblong with acumi- 
nate apex, flower bud 5/8 in. long more or less, lower scales dark brown, upper reddish 
brown with dark brown margins, acuminate, glabrous, keeled and forming a four-sided 
bud. Leaf -scar much raised, semicircular, not conspicuous, medium size; bundle-trace 
semicircular. Leaves oblong, ovate or lanceolate, 1-4 in. long, 3^-2 in. broad, acuminate, 
acute, often cuspidate, base cuneate or rounded, ciliolate, bright green, glabrous, or when 
young sometimes pubescent, and tinged Hay's Maroon (xm.) above, pale green, rarely 
glabrous, usually pilose near the base and on midrib beneath; petiole slender or stout, 
Yl in. long, occasionally pilose near the juncture with leaf and tinged Hay's Maroon 

123 



124 THE LILAC 

(xiii.) . Inflorescence borne on leafy or non-leafy shoots, normally terminal but frequently 
lateral, upright, 7-12 in. long, 4-5 in. broad; rhachis frequently quadrangular, puberulous 
or glabrous, lenticellate, color Hay's Maroon (xiii.) to Burnt Umber (xxviii.) ; pedicel 
short, tinged like rhachis; calyx short, truncate or with short acute teeth, frequently 
tinged like rhachis; corolla-tube slender, cylindric, 7 /i 6 in. long; corolla-lobes narrow, 
pointed, cucullate, spreading at right angles to corolla-tube and curling backward; corolla 
5 /i6 in. in diameter, color in bud Orange- Vinaceous to Hydrangea Pink to Pale Vinaceous 
(xxvii.) tinged on corolla-lobes with Deep Olive-Buff (xl.) ; when expanded Pale Vina- 
ceous turning to white on corolla-lobes without, white tinged Pale Vinaceous (xxvii.) near 
throat within; anthers Primrose Yellow (xxx.), inserted slightly above the middle of 
corolla-tube. Capsule oblong, smooth, lustrous, V12 in- long, obtusish, each valve 
terminating in a short tip. (The notes on the color of the flowers were taken from a 
plant (no. 17,360) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 

Habitat: China: province of Szechuan. 

Koehne and Lingelsheim based their description of Syringa Sweginzowii, 
published in 19 10, upon a living plant growing in the arboretum of Max von 
Sivers, at Roemershof, near Riga, Russia, which they believed to have come, in 
all probability, from eastern Asia. They stated that it is nearly related to S. rosea 
(Cornu) Lingelsheim [ = 5. villosa Vahl] but differs in the color of its flowers and in 
its smooth, pointed fruit. 

The original description, in Latin, translated, reads: "Branches gray or gray- 
ish-brown, sparingly lenticellate with round lenticels, entirely glabrous. Buds 
about 3 mm. long, ovate-conical, brown, glabrous. Leaves papery, oblong or ovate 
in outline, with base slightly attenuate, with apex often abruptly caudate-acuminate, 
5-7 cm. long, 2-3.5 cm - broad, brownish green above, entirely glabrous, beneath 
paler, along the primary veins white-pilose, ciliolate, with petiole 0.75 cm. - 1 cm. 
long, brownish. Panicles terminal or lateral, loose, elongated, 15-25 cm. long, 
few-bracted. Flowers yellowish-red. Calyx campanulate, subtruncate, 2 mm. 
long. Tube of corolla narrowly cylindrical, 8 mm. long, 2 mm. in diameter; lobes 
oblong-ovate, subacute. Stamens included. Fruit smooth, longitudinally striated, 
acute, 1 cm. long, 3 mm. in diameter." They refer to it as hardy at Roemershof. 

According to Bretschneider (Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 1020, 1898), G. 
N. Potanin, on his expedition of 1891-1894, made on behalf of the Imperial Russian 
Geographical Society, crossed the Ya lung river in western Szechuan at Nagachuka 
[Hokeou] in the middle of May, 1893, and again in early June of the same year, 
as he traveled between Batang and Ta tsien lu. As is noted later it was in this 
precise neighborhood that E. H. Wilson in 1904 collected S. Sweginzowii (no. 4080) 
and it is not unlikely that the plant growing in the arboretum of Max von Sivers 
was raised from seed collected in the same district by Potanin. 

Schneider (111. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 780, 191 1) states that he has seen no wild 
example of S. Sweginzowii but adds that close to it is a specimen in the herbarium 
of the Botanic Garden at St. Petersburg which was gathered in "desertum Sumpan," 



SYRINGA SWEGINZOWII 125 

also spelled Sungpan, in Szechuan, on June 1 1, 1894, by Berezovski. Mr. Wilson tells 
me that he considers the use of the word desert as strange since Sungpan is a most 
fertile region. Schneider mentions the flowers as undeveloped and the fruit as 
scarcely different. According to Bretschneider (Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 
1023, 1898) Michael Michaelovich Berezovski was zoologist of the Potanin expedi- 
tion of 1 891-1894, and was at Sungpan from February 23 to October 15, 1894. 
Bretschneider writes: "The Botan. Garden, St. Petersb. received from Berezovski 
a small but interesting collection of herbarium specimens and seeds from this 
expedition. Some of these plants have been raised there." Wilson, as noted later, 
in August, 1910, collected S. Sweginzowii (no. 4569) at Sungpan, and it is probable 
that the specimen noted by Schneider was the same species. It is possible therefore 
that either Berezovski or Potanin presented to Max von Sivers the material from 
which was grown his plant of S. Sweginzowii. 

Koehne in 1910 describes the flowers of S. Sweginzowii as salmon-colored, and 
the fruit capsules as smooth like those of 5. Josikaea, Bretschneideri [ = S. villosa], 
Emodi, Giraldiana, persica, chinensis and vulgaris. He complains that the 
specimens which he studied were cut off so short that it was impossible to tell 
whether they were terminal or lateral although he believes them in this species 
to be typically terminal as in S. Josikaea, Bretschneideri [ = S. villosa], Giraldiana 
and Emodi. Possibly Koehne was writing, not of S. Giraldiana Schneider, but of 
the plant here called S. oblata var. Giraldii Rehder. This has smooth fruit capsules 
while those of S. Giraldiana are marked with lenticels. Both bloom from lateral 
buds. Schneider, as here noted under S. Giraldiana, placed that species in the 
wrong group of Lilacs (Villosae) for its flower clusters are produced from lateral, 
not from terminal, buds. 

It was not until 191 2 that Schneider identified the specimen (no. 4080) collected 
for Messrs. James Veitch and Sons by E. H. Wilson in June, 1904, with this species. 
He writes that the country of the typical 5. Sweginzowii is still unknown and that 
the Wilson specimen "differs only in the leaves being glabrous beneath, in the 
distinctly but minutely puberulous inflorescence and branchlets, and in the nearly 
truncate calyx." I have found, on other herbarium material and on the living 
plants in the Arnold Arboretum collection, that the leaves are pilose along the 
veins beneath, not glabrous, while the puberulous character of "the inflorescence 
and branchlets" is rarely present, these in general being glabrous. As mentioned 
under the nearly related 5. tomentella Bureau and Franchet, pubescent and glabrous 
forms, often connected by intermediate plants, are to be found in many Lilac species, 
and in this genus pubescence does not appear to be a consistent character. Exami- 
nation of the specimen (no. 4080) described by Schneider, shows the calyx to be 
sometimes truncate, sometimes finely toothed. Nor does this appear, in other 
specimens, to be a fixed character. 

Mr. Wilson's field notes state that the plant (no. 4080) was growing in a ravine 
at an elevation of 11,000 ft., and was a bush 6 ft. tall. His diary more specifically 



126 THE LILAC 

records that he collected it in a ravine in the descent to the Ya lung river at Naga- 
chuka, the Tibetan name for Hokeou, on June 13, 1904. 

A second specimen of S. Sweginzowii (no. 4569) also collected by Wilson and 
now in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum, was a bush 6 ft. tall, growing 
in thickets at an altitude of 8000 to 10,000 ft. ; this was found in northern Szechuan, 
towards Sungpan, in August, 1910. It was this specimen which Schneider in 191 2 
described as S. tetanoloba; he writes: "Though the specimen is rather meager, 
this form can be easily distinguished from S. Sweginzowii Koehne and Lingelsheim 
and from all other species of this group by the extremely long lobes of the corolla." 
In 1 91 7 he writes: "This species described from a meager specimen proves identical 
with 5. Sweginzowii Koehne and Lingelsheim. It comes from the Sungpan region 
from which seeds of the type probably have been introduced to Petrograd by 
Russian botanists." Lingelsheim in 1920 retains 5. tetanoloba as a species but notes 
that he has not seen the Wilson material. 

In 191 1 Schneider writes that he has seen 5. Sweginzowii in bloom in the Jardin 
des Plantes, Paris, in 1909, and has himself received it in 1908 from Max von 
Sivers. He states in two instances (111. Handb. Laubholzk., 1. c; Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges., 1. c.) that the plant is found in gardens under the name 5. pubescens. 
In the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum are rive specimens of S. Sweginzowii 
from Schneider's herbarium: one (unnumbered) from the Jardin des Plantes; a 
second (no. 1) from the arboretum of Max von Sivers at Roemershof, Russia; a 
third and fourth (nos. 761 h and 244 a) from the Imperial Botanic Garden, St. 
Petersburg; and a fifth (no. 1063) from the Forestry Institute, St. Petersburg. 
On most of these Schneider has noted that the plant was grown "sub nomine pu- 
bescens. ," Silva Tarouca and Schneider also mention that it is sometimes culti- 
vated under that name. Bois and Grignan state that this species was introduced 
to France from central China through the Museum of Natural History, Paris. 

In England S. Sweginzowii was exhibited for the first time at a meeting of the 
Royal Horticultural Society on June 8, 191 5, by Mr. Vicary Gibbs, when it re- 
ceived an Award of Merit. "The Gardeners' Chronicle" of 191 5, where this exhibit 
is noted, gives an excellent figure of this species, which, although only a small 
pot-plant, was flowering abundantly. 

The Arnold Arboretum received its first plant (no. 17,360 Arn. Arb.) in November 
1910, from the nursery of Regel and Kesselring of St. Petersburg. It flowered for 
the first time in 191 2 (Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 59, 1. c). Although, like many other 
Lilac species, S. Sweginzowii does not produce the extremely large individual flowers 
associated with the modern garden forms of the Common Lilac, yet they possess a 
delicacy and refinement which makes them extremely beautiful. It is one of the 
loveliest of all the Lilacs. The plant in the Arboretum is about ten feet tall, with 
graceful, slender branches, arching, when in bloom, under the weight of many 
clusters; these appear normally from terminal, but frequently also from lateral 
buds on the same branchlet. The dark color of the leafy shoots upon which the 



SYRINGA SWEGINZOWII 127 

clusters are borne, and the dark rhachis, contrast noticeably with the pale yellowish 
pink flowers. The clusters are open, never crowded, so that the beauty of the 
individual flower with its slender tube and narrow, spreading lobes, is seen to full 
advantage. The anthers are hidden. The flowers have a pleasant and delicate 
fragrance. In winter the gray bark, marked with dark lenticels, is a noticeable 
feature of this shrub and at this time the plant is seen to be extremely "twiggy." 
The leaves unfold late in the spring and fall early in the autumn. Each year the 
species blooms profusely and in the Arboretum has proved entirely hardy. 

Professor Sargent (Bull. Am. Arb. n. s. vi. 51, 1920) in mentioning the eighteen 
best new shrubs for northern gardens introduced up to 1920 includes S. Swegin- 
zowii. He considers it hardy in southern New England and the middle United 
States. 

The species was named for Sweginzov, governor of the Russian province of 
Livonia, of which Riga was the capital city. See von Schwerin in Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges. no. 34, 351 (1924). 

The approved common name of Chengtu Lilac has been adopted by "Standard- 
ized Plant Names." I know of no specimen which has been collected at Chengtu. 

S. Sweginzowii is closely related, and bears a striking resemblance, to 5. tomen- 
tella Bureau and Franchet, although it is more slender in habit and inflorescence. 
It is close also to S. villosa Vahl although the two differ widely in general ap- 
pearance. 

The 5. Sweginzowii superba which was introduced by the firm of V. Lemoine et 
fils, Nancy, France, in 191 5, I believe to be identical with the typical form. In a 
letter of December 8, 1925, which is quoted under the hybrid 5. nanceiana, Mr. 
E. Lemoine states that in 1907 he received branches of this plant from the Museum 
of Natural History, Paris, where it was cultivated under the number 5576 and where 
it did not flourish. After it had flowered he recognized its nearness to the S. 
Sweginzowii which he had received from the late Max von Sivers of Riga. In the 
English edition of the Lemoine catalogue no indication is given that this variety is 
in any respect different from typical S. Sweginzowii. It states: "This superb 
plant was introduced from central China through the Paris Museum. Its leaves, 
of moderate size, are dull green and sharply pointed; its flowers, borne in long 
ramose clusters covering the whole shrub in June, are of a soft flesh colour and 
deliciously fragrant; it is one of the loveliest shrubs we possess." S. Sweginzowii 
superba was figured in "The Gardeners' Chronicle" for 1918, but in the illustration 
no differences from the type are apparent, nor are any noted in the text. The 
article, which is unsigned, states that "Mr. Turner, of Slough, showed an improved 
form named superba at the meeting [of the Royal Horticultural Society] on May 
28, last and the variety also received an Award of Merit." This may indicate 
the origin of the approved common name Turner adopted for S. Sweginzowii 
superba by "Standardized Plant Names." So far as I know Mr. Turner merely 
exhibited the plant. Specimens from a plant (no. 689) of this name growing in 



128 THE LILAC 

the collection of the Department of Parks, Rochester, New York, show flower 
clusters varying in length from nine to eleven inches. Upon one specimen, what 
appears to be one extremely large inflorescence, is produced by five flower-clusters, 
four of which are lateral, and one terminal. These specimens show no characters 
which are not to be found in plants of typical S. Sweginzowii when grown under 
good conditions. Rehder (Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 1. c.) retains 5. Swegin- 
zowii superba as a variety but notes that it is "scarcely different" from the type. 



SYRINGA GIRALDIANA 

Syringa Giraldiana Schneider in Engler, Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 82, p. 88 (1905) ; 
111. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 779, figs. 488 a-b, n-o, 489 f (191 1); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. 
Ges. no. 20, 227, 230 (1911). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 
84 (1920). — Kache in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 28, 249 (1919). — Stares, 
Cerines {Syringa L.), 4, 23 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

A shrub apparently in habit like S. villosa of the subsect. Villosae. Branches gray- 
brown, very glabrous, with yellower branchlets, sparingly lenticellate. Leaves narrow 
at the base, broad elliptic or oblong, short-acuminate at the apex, more rarely rotundate- 
acuminate, 4-8 cm. long, 1.5-4 cm. broad, brownish green (in dried specimens) and very 
glabrous above, paler, white-villous along the veins, petiole 1 cm. long, sparingly pilose 
above. Inflorescence (fruiting only known) more or less loose, about 10 cm. long, very 
glabrous, minutely lenticellate. Calyx rather small, campanulate, 1 mm. long and 
equally broad, open sinuate-denticulate. Fruit falcate, 1-1.5 cm - l°ng, acute, conspicu- 
ously covered with numerous lenticels. Flowers unknown. (Translation of description 
given by A. Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 84, 1920.) 

Habitat: China: province of Shensi. 

C. K. Schneider first wrote of Syringa Giraldiana from a fruiting specimen 
(no. 4405) collected by the Rev. Giuseppe Giraldi, a Roman Catholic missionary, 
in the province of Shensi, China. All the Giraldi collections are in the Biondi- 
Giraldi Herbarium in the Botanical Museum, Florence, Italy. Dr. Pampanini 
kindly sent me a complete record of all Giraldi material with their notations 
and this record shows that S. Giraldiana (no. 4405) was collected in August, 1899, 
"in cacumine Lin-sui-san prope Ngo-san," in northern Shensi. According to 
Dr. Bretschneider (Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 928, 1898) Giraldi collected 
from 1890 to 1895 in the province of Shensi, especially in Mt. Tai pai shan in the 
Tsin ling Range. Giraldi's labels frequently note his collections as made in northern 
Shensi but this range of mountains runs more nearly through central, or south of 
central, Shensi. Fragments and a photograph of this specimen were kindly sent 
me by Dr. Pampanini. 

Schneider briefly described it as a shrub, resembling in habit S. villosa, 
but differing from that species in the more pilose branches of the infloresence, in the 
shorter pedicels and in the verrucose fruit capsules. He notes that in these latter 
S. Giraldiana seems to bear some relation to 5. Dielsiana and to S. microphylla, — 
two species which have since been united. At fruiting time he states that the 
calyx is more or less deformed and almost glabrous. The flowers he has not seen. 

129 



130 THE LILAC 

In his "Illustriertes Handbuch der Laubholzkunde" he gives the locality where 
the plant was collected as the Tsin ling Range, which Lingelsheim in his monograph 
points out is incorrect. Later (Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges., 1. c.) Schneider classifies 
the plant as close to 5. reflexa, as well as to S. villosa but he here places it in the 
wrong group of Lilacs, for its flower clusters are produced from lateral, rather than 
from terminal buds and not upon leafy shoots. I have not seen the original speci- 
men but it was examined by Mr. Alfred Rehder when in Florence, and he then 
noted that S. Giraldiana "belongs to the 5. pubescens group." Lingelsheim also 
states that Schneider classified it wrongly, and he identifies with this species another 
unnumbered specimen collected on July 14, 1897, by Giraldi at Kiu tou san, Shensi, 
which is also in the Biondi-Giraldi Herbarium. 

I have seen but a fragment of the type specimen; the fruit is similar to that of 
the other species of this group, — slender, sparingly and slightly verrucose, with 
an acute to acuminate apex. The leaves, in form elliptic to oblong, are short 
acuminate at their apex, glabrous above, paler and villose on the midrib and at 
the base of the lower veins beneath. The petiole is about % /% in. long. 

As noted under S. pinetorum W. W. Smith, S. Giraldiana and certain other 
Lilacs classified in the same group need further study. 



Plate LXI 





H 



SYRINGA JULIANAE 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6624) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate LXII 






SYRINGA JULIANAE 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 6624) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. May 3, 1926. 



Plate LXIII 




01 



c 
p 



in 



- 



o 
o 



W 
< 

< 

I— i r- 
h-> E 



o 
c 



O 

CO 



o 

l-l 



o 

C 



l-l 

o 

4-3 

'53 



o 



o 
o 

c 



M 
C 
M 

c 



Plate LX1Y 








■* 






<N 
ON 




\D 


M 


w 


O 


-V 


< 


6 


H 


< 


£ 


c 


I-) 


3 


& 


3 


t— i 


►-> 








>-l 




< 


o 


tH 


1— t 


< 


o 

i 


CO 




i 
-t-> 




M 

< 


k3 



Plate LXV 













SYRINGA JULIANAE 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6624) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked August, 1924. 



Plate LXVI 



10 

<N 
On 



►■h _, aj 




O 






SYRINGA JULIANAE 

Syringa Julianae Schneider, HI. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 777, fig. 488 v-x (191 1); in 
Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 229 (191 1); in Kew Bull. Misc. Inform, xxv. 37 
(1912); in Sargent, PI. Wilson. 1. 297 (1912), under 5. Potaninii Schneider; in Silva 
Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913); in Gartenschonheit, vm. 143, fig. (1927). — 
[Prain] in Bot. Mag. cxxxvm. t. 8423 (191 2); reprinted in part in Kew Bull. Misc. 
Inform, xxv. 158 (191 2). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 40, May 9 (1913); n. s. n. 
30 (1916); rv. 26 (1918); v. 18 (1919). — Bean, Trees and Shrubs Brit. Isles, 11. 568, 
fig. (1914). — Garden, lxxix. 194, fig. (1915). — Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxin. 154 (1916); 
Aristocrats of the Garden, 222 (1917). — Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 
173 (1916). — Render in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3300 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees 
and Shrubs, 754 (1927). — Jour. Intern. Gard. Club, 1. t. (opp. p. 530) (191 7). — Lingels- 
heim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 85 (1920). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. 
Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 403 (1922). — A. 0[sborn] in Garden, lxxxviii. 301 (1923). — 
Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923). — Mottet, Arb. Arbust. 
Orn. 339, fig. 147 (1925). — Stares, Cerines {Syringa L.), 4, 20 (1926), reprinted from 
Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

S[yringa] villosa Hort. Veitch according to [Prain] in Bot. Mag. cxxxvin. t. 8423 (191 2), 

as a synonym. 
Syringa verrucosa Schneider in Sargent, PL Wilson. 1. 298 (191 2); 111. Handb. Laubholzk. 

n. 1063 (1912). — Wilson, Naturalist in western China, 1. 37 (1913). — Lingelsheim 

in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-h. 95 (1920). 

A spreading shrub, up to 6 ft. tall, as broad as tall; branches spreading horizontally, 
glabrous, sparingly lenticellate, marked conspicuously with fissures with dark raised 
edges; branchlets puberulent for two years, rarely glabrous, sparingly lenticellate, tinged 
when young Dark Indian Red (xxvn.). Winter-buds ovoid with acute apex, flower bud 
yi in. long more or less, scales dark brown with reddish or yellowish brown margins, 
acuminate, pilose-pubescent, prominently keeled and forming a markedly four-sided 
bud. Leaf-scar much raised, shallow shield-shaped, conspicuous, small; bundle-trace 
raised, semicircular. Leaves elliptic-ovate to elliptic-obovate, %~2 l A m - l° n g> Z A~^ X A 
in. broad, acute or acuminate, base cuneate, occasionally rounded, ciliolate, dark green, 
short-pubescent, rarely almost glabrous above, paler, villous or pubescent, rarely only 
pilose on the veins beneath; petiole \irY2 in. long, slender, pubescent, rarely pilose, tinged 
Dark Indian Red (xxvn.). Inflorescence lateral, rarely terminal, upright, 2-5 in. long, 
Yi m - broad; rhachis puberulent, rarely glabrous, Dark Indian Red (xxvn.), sparingly 
lenticellate; pedicel short, pubescent, rarely glabrous; calyx spreading at top, glabrous, 
with acute teeth, Dark Indian Red (xxvn.); corolla-tube slender, cylindric, 5 /i 6 in. long; 
corolla-lobes spreading at right angles to corolla-tube, frequently 5 or 6 in number, 
pointed, cucullate; corolla Y%m. in diameter; color in bud Dull Indian Purple to Vinace- 

181 < 



132 THE LILAC 

ous-Lilac (xliv.); when expanded Light Vinaceous-Lilac to white tinged with Pale 
Vinaceous-Lilac without, white with eye of Light Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) within; anthers 
Light Brownish Drab (xlv.), inserted just below the mouth of corolla-tube. Capsule 
oblong, dull, dark brown, sometimes smooth when immature, generally verrucose, Yi in. 
long, acuminate. (The notes on the color of the flowers were taken from a plant (no. 
6624) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 

Habitat: China: province of Hupeh. 

Syringa Julianae was first discovered in late October or early November, 1901, 
at Fang hsien in the northwestern part of the province of Hupeh, China, by E. H. 
Wilson. His field book states that it was a bush 10 ft. tall, growing at an altitude 
of about 8000 ft. and somewhat uncommon. Seed, no. 1220 a, Mr. Wilson tells 
me, was sent by him in that year to Messrs. James Veitch and Sons, Coombe 
Wood, who raised and distributed plants under the name S. villosa. The "Botanical 
Magazine" for 191 2 notes that "The plant which supplied the material for our 
plate was obtained from Messrs. Veitch in 1909 under the name S. villosa." One 
plant was sent to the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; another to the Arnold 
Arboretum where it was received in November, 1907, and first flowered in 1909. 

Schneider's original description, based on Wilson's no. 1220 a (ex Hort. Veitch), 
translated, reads: Apparently a short and densely branched shrub, height?; the 
young to two-year-old branches more or less densely villose, setose, one year 
bran chiefs blackish gray; leaves about like fig. 487 m, the point sometimes less 
distinct, above deep dull green, more or less short- villose, beneath somewhat grayish 
green, more densely pubescent especially along the chief veins, also the petiole 
pubescent, [the leaves] 2.5 x 1 to 4.3 x 2.3 cm. on flowering branchlets. The in- 
florescence small, about 6 cm. long, axis and pedicels pubescent like the branches, 
flowers pale or whitish lilac, calyx violet, glabrous, distinctly toothed, corolla-lobes 
spreading, about 2-2.5 Toam.. long; the fruit unknown. 

There is in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum an immature fruiting speci- 
men sent from Kew which was taken from the type plant (no. 1220 a) and which 
shows the fruit capsules at that stage to be non- verrucose. Verrucose fruit capsules 
are now considered to be characteristic of this species. Specimens in the same 
herbarium collected over a period of years from both a plant at Holm Lea, Brook- 
line, Massachusetts, and from the Arboretum plant, indicate how imperfectly one 
can estimate the true worth of an immature plant ; for flowering specimens taken 
in 1909, the first year of blooming, show short, compact flower-clusters, resembling 
only in botanical characters the more open and larger ones produced on the same 
plants in 1910, 191 2 and 191 7. 

In the same herbarium is a specimen (no. 2579) of unopened flowers and of old 
fruit, which was collected by E. H. Wilson in western Hupeh during his expedition 
to China of 1 907-1 908, and upon which Schneider based his species Syringa verru- 
cosa. Upon it at a later time Schneider changed the determination to S. Julianae. 
It was collected on a cliff on the summit of Wem tsao Mt., Hsing shan hsien, 



SYRINGA JULIANAE 133 

in western Hupeh, at an altitude of about 7000 ft., and is noteworthy because of 
the glabrous branches, rhachis and pedicels; the leaves are merely pilose on the 
veins beneath, rather than as commonly, short-pubescent. 

Wilson writes in his "A Naturalist in Western China": "On the summit 
Box is a common shrub and growing with it I discovered a new species of Lilac, 
S. verrucosa." 

Of S. verrucosa [ = 5. Julianae] Schneider states: "This species seems to be 
nearly allied to 5. yunnanensis Franchet, of which I have not yet seen ripe fruits, 
and it is not impossible that it is identical with 5. yunnanensis, but in that species 
the leaves are much paler, rather whitish beneath, and the inflorescence is 
finely pilose. S. verrucosa and S. yunnanensis require further study." S. Julianae 
differs from the species 5. yunnanensis, among other respects, in the fact that 
the leaves are epapillose on the under surface and the anthers violet, not yellow. 
Moreover in 5. Julianae the flower clusters appear from lateral, rather than from 
terminal buds as in 5. yunnanensis, and the two species belong therefore to different 
groups of Lilacs. 

This species is most nearly related to S. velutina Komarov and to me bears a 
striking resemblance in habit and inflorescence to old plants of S. velutina (no. 5473-1 
Arn. Arb.) growing in the Arnold Arboretum since 1902 which until recently were 
considered to be a distinct species, S. Koehneana Schneider, although when received 
from Regel and Kesselring they bore the name 5. velutina. See 5. velutina. 

Schneider notes that he named S. Julianae for his wife. Juliana Lilac has been 
adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant Names." 

Growing in the Arnold Arboretum S. Julianae (no. 6624 Arn. Arb.) forms a 
hemispherical shrub ; it is well covered with small foliage, velvet-like to the touch, 
and, during the first and second weeks of June, with many clusters of pale flowers 
of a not very pleasing fragrance; the branchlets bearing them are dark reddish 
purple. These flower-clusters are frequently produced, on the same branchlet, 
from several pairs of lateral buds, sometimes from as many as four, and as they 
mingle with each other have the appearance of one large inflorescence. When 
open the individual flower is noticeably darker without than within and the pale 
grayish blue anthers are noticeable in the throat. It is not unusual to find flowers 
with five or six corolla-lobes, rather than the customary four. The leaves unfold 
moderately early in the spring and are retained, still green, until late October. The 
bark of the old wood is interestingly marked with dark-edged fissures, net-like in 
effect. The habit of the plant is such that it can be grown to better advantage as 
an isolated specimen than in a mixed planting. 



Plate LXYII 




SYRINGA VELUTINA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 10,955) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate LXVIII 




SYRINGA VELUTINA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 10,955-6) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. April 30, 1926. 



Plate LXIX 




<N 



Pi 

3 



< O 
p— i 

•^ pi 

> 5 



t/3 



■— 
3 



cd 



s < 



Cfl o 
3 

< 



O 



en 
3 






Plate LXX 




SYRINGA VELUTINA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 9320) 

Flower clusters. June 7, 1924. 



Plate LXXI 






o 




•< 


f*5 




a 




* 


1— 1 


d 


t^. 


H 


c 


a> 


& 


<—* 


c 


u 


£ 


3 


w 


3 


•— » 


> 


<u 






1* 




< 


O 


i- 


O 

t— ( 


H 
< 


O 


« 


*TD 


q=i 


JH 




c 


Cfl 


O 


• ^H 




c. 


-4-) 




< 


cd 



Plate LXXII 





SYRINGA VELUTINA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 10,955) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked August, 1924. 



Plate LXXIII 




6 
g 

3 



p— i 
H 
P 
i-l 
W 
> 

O o 
« < 

o 
a 

< 



o 






o 



cq 



SYRINGA VELUTINA 

Syringa velutina Komarov in Act. Hort. Petrop. xviii. 428 (1901) (Sp. Nov. Fl. As. 
Or., p. 12); in Act. Hort. Petrop. xxv. 254, 1. 11. (Fl. Mansh. in.) (1907). — M. Smith in 
Hemsley in Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxxvi. 524 (Ind. Fl. Sin. in.) (1903-1905). — 
Schneider, HI. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 778, figs. 488 e-h, 489 n-o (1911); 1062 (1912); in 
Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 227, 229 (1911). — Nakai in Jour. College Sci. 
Univ. Tokyo, xxxi. 91 (Fl. Kor. pt. 11.) (1911); in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxii. 129 (1918); 
Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 49, t. xx., fig. a (p. 50) (1921). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 57, 
June 5 (1914); n. s. viii. 23 (1912). — Bean, Trees and Shrubs Brit. Isles, 11. 569 (1914), 
under S. Julianae Schneider. — Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 173 (1916). — 
Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3302 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 
754 (1927). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 86 (1920), excluding 
synonym S. Potanini Schneider. — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 
ed. 2, 404 (1922), under S. Koehneana Schneider. — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in 
Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923). — A. 0[sborn] in Garden, lxxxvii. 302 (1923). — Horti- 
culture, n. s. iv. 67 (1926). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 4, 21 (1926), reprinted 
from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

Ligustrum patulum Palibin in Act. Hort. Petrop. xvm. 156 (Consp. Fl. Kor. pt. 11. 10) 
(1900). — Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxn. 124 (1918); Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 61 (1921). 

Syringa tomentella Koehne in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 19, 113 (1910), in part, 
as to the synonym S. velutina Komarov. 

Syringa Fauriei Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxii. 129 (1918). — Not Leveille. 

S\yringa) Koehneana Schneider, 111. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 1063, fig. 627 a-e (191 2); 
in Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold 
Arb. n. s. in. 32 (1917); v. 27 (1919); vm. 23 (1922). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. 
Cycl. Hort. vi. 3302 (191 7). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 
ed. 2, 404 (1922). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 485 
(1923). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 4, 22 (1926); reprinted from Darzkopibas, 
11. (1926). 

Syringa velutina Hort. according to Schneider, 111. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 1063 (1912), as 
a synonym of S. Koehneana Schneider. 

Syringa Palibiniana Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxvn. 32 (1913); Rep. Veg. Diamond 
Mts. Corea, 182, t. m. fig. b (1917); Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. t. xxi. (1921). — Wilson in 
Jour. Arnold Arb. 1. 41 (1919). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 
i-n. 116 (1920). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. vni. 23 (1922). — Olmsted, 
Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PL Names, 485 (1923). — Rehder, Man. Cult. Trees 
and Shrubs, 754 (1927). — C. S. in Garden, xci. 594, fig. (1927). 

Syringa villosa var. lactea Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxvin. 330 (1914); xxrx. no. 349, 
109 (1915); Rep. Veg. Mt. Chirisan, 64, 79 (1915). 

Syringa villosa Nakai, Rep. Veg. Mt. Chirisan, 43, 64 (1915); in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxrx. 
no. 348, 109 (1915). — Not Vahl. 

135 



136 THE LILAC 

Syringa micrantha Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxii. 129 (1918); Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 49, 

t. xix. (1921). 
Syringa Fauriei var. lactea Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxii. 130 (1918). 
Syringa Kamibayashii Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxii. 130 (1918). 
Syringa venosa Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxii. 130 (1918); Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 53, t. 

xxin. (1921). 
Syringa venosa var. lactea Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxii. 131 (1918); Fl. Sylv. Kor. 

x. 53 (i9 21 )- 
Syringa Palibiniana var. lactea Nakai, Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 52 (1921). 

Syringa Palibiniana var. Kamibayashii Nakai, Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 52, t. xxii. (1921). — 

Render, Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 754 (1927). 

A shrub up to 10 ft. tall; branches upright, slender, lenticellate; branchlets slightly 
pubescent, puberulous or nearly glabrous, often glandular, lenticellate, tinged at first 
Dark Vinaceous-Brown (xxxix.). Winter-buds ovoid with acute apex, flower bud Y% 
in. long more or less, scales often loosely appressed, dark purplish brown with reddish 
brown margins, acuminate, puberulous, sometimes glabrous, third pair of scales 
frequently longer than fourth pair. Leaf-scar much raised, shallow shield-shaped, 
conspicuous, small; bundle-trace raised, semicircular. Leaves elliptic to ovate-elliptic 
to broad-elliptic, 1-4 in. long, %-2 in. broad, acuminate, short-acuminate or obtusish, 
base broad-cuneate or rounded, ciliolate, slightly pubescent to glabrous above, densely 
or slightly pubescent or glabrous and pilose on the midrib and primary veins beneath; 
petiole yi~% in. long, pubescent or pilose; sometimes tinged Dark Vinaceous-Brown 
(xxxix.). Inflorescence lateral, upright, 2^-8 in. long; rhachis, pedicel and calyx 
pubescent, puberulous or glabrous, tinged Dark Vinaceous-Brown (xxxix.); pedicel 
short; calyx with shallow, rounded or acute teeth; corolla-tube funnelform, Vio- 3 /io 
in. long; corolla-lobes remaining upright or expanding to a right angle with corolla-tube, 
sometimes curling backward as they fade, short, broad at base, acute or obtuse at apex, 
usually cucullate; corolla 1 /h~ 3 /w in. in diameter, color in bud Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) 
or white tinged same; when expanded white tinged with Light Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) 
without, white within; anthers Dark Slate-Purple to Vinaceous-Purple (xliv.), inserted 
just below the mouth of corolla-tube, small. Capsule slender, oblong, %-% in. long, 
obtusish, acuminate or acute, marked with few or numerous small lenticels, each valve 
terminating frequently in a short, slender tip. (The notes on the color of the flowers 
were taken from a plant (no. 10,955) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 

Habitat: Korea. 

Syringa velutina was collected in 1897 in northern Korea by V. L. Komarov 
who, in his "Species Novae Florae Asiae Orientalis" published in 1901 in the 
"Acta Horti Petropolitani," described it for the first time as a shrub 6-12 ft. tall, 
branched, with slender erect branches, with gray bark marked by many lenticels; 
the leaves papery, petioled, blade ovate, 3-6-nerved, cuneate or attenuate at the 
base, rarely rounded, the apex more or less acuminate, the margins ciliolate, above 
dull green, minutely pilosulous, beneath pale, very densely velvety (rarely villose), 
with small beards along the veins, the petioles white-pilose and glandular; the 
inflorescence all densely short-pilose and minutely glandular, the panicle unin- 



SYRINGA VELUTINA 137 

terrupted, pyramidal, the pedicels almost lacking or as long as calyx, the calyx 
velvety white-pilose, glandular at the base, the bracts minute, glandular, lanceolate, 
obtuse, the corolla slender, up to i cm. long, fragrant; the capsule obliquely elon- 
gated, warty, the seeds oblong, winged. 

Komarov cites three unnumbered specimens: the first collected on June 23, in 
the district of Musang, in the valley of Kosari pi at the rocky summit of the 
mountains; the second on July 1, among the rocks of the mountains following the 
valley of Un czchen gan, below the small town of U czen po, in the district of 
Kap san; the third, with mature seed, on August 31, in the valley of the river 
Jalu dsian, above the mouth of the river Cza schin gan (Cze son gan) in the province 
of Kenge, district of Cze son. Komarov notes that this species differs from S. 
pubescens Turczaninov in its gray bark, in its larger leaves, pilosulous above and 
velvety beneath, in its inflorescence with glandular-pilose calyx, and in its corolla 
ten times longer than the calyx; and from S. villosa Vahl in its uninterrupted in- 
florescence, its gray bark, its fruit capsules acute when mature, its leaves pilose 
(not glabrous) above, and in its entire habit. 5. velutina is closely related to S. 
pubescens, but belongs to a different group of Lilacs from S. villosa which produces 
its flower clusters, leafy at the base, from terminal rather than from lateral buds 
as in S. velutina. 

In a second description of S. velutina which appeared in his "Flora Manshuriae," 
also published in the "Acta Horti Petropolitani" in 1907, Komarov states further 
that the plant differs from S. villosa in its elliptic acuminate leaves, puberulous 
above, in its uninterrupted inflorescence, in its fruit which is often beaked, and in 
its always smaller stature; and from S. microphylla Diels, a species to which it is 
closely related, in its leaves very attenuate at the base, in its pinnate, not reticulate 
veins, and in its most dense velvety pubescence. He tells us that the plant occurs 
quite frequently among rocks, rocky slopes, or mountain gravel. 

Fragments from a specimen of 5. velutina collected by Komarov, no. 1259, which 
is in the Biondi-Giraldi Herbarium, Florence, Italy, were sent me by Dr. Pam- 
panini. It is dated May 22, 1897, and came from "Fluvium Turingan (?), Dis- 
trictus Musang, Trajectus Czao-rieng," in northern Korea. It was received at 
Florence from the herbarium of the Imperial Botanic Garden, St. Petersburg. 
Lingelsheim cites this specimen. 

Dr. Takenoshin Nakai also found the plant in northern Korea and he cites 
(Tokyo Bot. Mag., 1. c), in addition to Komarov's specimen (no. 1259), three 
others which he himself had found: one (no. 2185) at Cho dado, another (same 
number) from the mountain Ba jo rei, and a third (no. 2183) from Tai ko ri. He 
cites as a Japanese name for this species "Usuge-hashidoi" or "Birodo-hashidoi." 

Mr. E. H. Wilson, on his expedition to eastern Asia made for the Arnold Arbo- 
retum in 1917-1918, had the opportunity to observe the plant growing wild in Korea, 
and from seed (nos. 9128 and 9320) which he gathered in September, 191 7, numer- 
ous plants have been raised, now flowering yearly in the Arnold Arboretum collection. 



138 THE LILAC 

The Ligustrum patulum of Palibin is based upon a specimen collected by Miss 
A. Sonntag, who, according to Bretschneider (Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 
095, 1898), resided at the Russian Legation at Seoul, Korea. Her collections were 
given to the Botanic Garden, St. Petersburg. In the herbarium of the Museum of 
Natural History, Paris, is a specimen which bears the label: "Ligustrum patulum 
Palib[in]. Korea, Seoul: prope Tap Tong, 20 Majo 1895 (Sontag)." This notation 
is identical with that given by Palibin for his type specimen, and the example in 
Paris is presumably a co-type. It was received from the Botanic Garden, St. 
Petersburg. In his description of this new species Palabin does not mention the 
color of the flowers; he states that the leaves are villose beneath along the midrib 
and margins. There is nothing in the description which is not applicable to a 
Lilac; he had not seen the berries, — "Baccae non visae." I examined the Sonntag 
specimen which is in Paris and believe it to be identical, both in flowers and in 
foliage with S. velutina Komarov; it is an example of the less pubescent form, 
classified by Nakai as S. Palibiniana (here considered to be a synonym of S. velutina), 
a plant with leaves glabrous above but pilose along the midrib and primary veins 
beneath. In writing of Ligustrum patulum Palibin, Nakai (Tokyo Bot. Mag., 1. a), 
without enumerating it among the species which he records, states that this species, 
which he has not seen, is said to have leaves cordate at the base. He cites no 
specimen and I do not know upon what he based this opinion for Palibin describes 
the leaves as ovate, ovate-elliptic, acuminate, and makes no mention of a cordate 
base. The leaves of the Paris specimen are not cordate. Nakai states that Ligu- 
strum patulum is the same as Ligustrum acutissimum Koehne, but after examining 
the Paris specimen he recognized it as a Syringa as is shown by his note on the 
specimen a photograph of which is in the Arnold Arboretum. 

Koehne (Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges., 1. c), in writing of S. tomentella Bureau 
and Franchet, gives as a synonym S. velutina Komarov, and bases his description 
upon a living plant cultivated in the arboretum of Max von Sivers. He is confusing 
the Komarov plant with the S. velutina of Bureau and Franchet [ = S. tomentella] 
when he states that it was introduced, according to Niemetz (Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges. no. 17, 191, 1908), by Simon-Louis freres, but he is writing of the true 
S. velutina Komarov when he notes that it was growing in the arboretum of Max 
von Sivers at Roemershof, Russia. Lingelsheim mentions the plant as cultivated 
in that collection. The S. velutina of Bureau and Franchet is discussed under S. 
tomentella. 

Under the name S. velutina a plant was received at the Arnold Arboretum 
in November, 1902, from the nursery of Regel and Kesselring, St. Petersburg, 
and two plants (no. 5473-1 Arn. Arb.) now in the collection were raised from grafts, 
taken February, 1907, from that original plant. These first flowered in 1914 
(Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 57, June 5, 1914) and since 191 7 have done so each year. 
Schneider, who first described 5. Koehneana in 191 2, basing it upon Koehne's 
S. tomentella just mentioned, in 1916 identified with this species an herbarium 



SYRINGA VELUTINA 139 

specimen now in the Arnold Arboretum which was taken from one of these plants, 
and the name under which the plant had arrived, — S. velutina, — was then, and 
until recently, abandoned. Schneider's S. Koehneana is now very generally con- 
sidered to be only a synonym of S. velutina from which, according to his description 
and figures, it differs in no important particular. 

Both Schneider and Rehder mention S. velutina Hort. as a synonym of S. 
Koehneana Schneider. 

Dr. Nakai was evidently for a time confused in regard to the S. Fauriei of 
Leveille for (Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxn. 129, 1918) he gives as a synonym of that 
species 5. Palibiniana Nakai, and still later (Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 51, t. xxn., 192 1) 
cites S. Fauriei Nakai (not Leveille) as a synonym of S. Palibiniana. In describing 
(Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxn. 129, 1918) this S. Fauriei [ = S. velutina] he names the 
Wilson specimen (no. 8602) which is here later noted as an example of the white- 
flowered form of S. velutina. He cites also six specimens of his own collecting 
(nos. 64, 658, 393) from Mt. Chirisan and (nos. 5751, 5755, 5758) from Kum gang 
san; also the Faurie (no. 715) and B. Maruyama (no. 929) specimens from Kum 
gang san. The plant's Japanese name is given as " Chosen-hashidoi " and its 
Korean name as "No-dul-mok." A Faurie specimen (no. 715) from the Diamond 
Mountains is in the Arnold Arboretum herbarium. 

With S. Palibiniana he also (Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 51, 1921) identifies the S. villosa 
Nakai (not Vahl) which he had mentioned earlier, under the name S. villosa 
Vahl, as growing at Mt. Chirisan. 

Dr. Nakai has described as distinct species four Lilacs which I have here included 
in the species S. velutina, — S. Palibiniana, S. micrantha, S. Kamibayashii (which 
he later classifies as a variety of his 5. Palibiniana) and S. venosa. 

In Syringa many species have glabrous and pubescent forms between which 
exist intermediate examples. For that reason I consider pubescence to have no 
great value in a classification of Lilacs, and have included in 5. velutina, both 
the pubescent, the glabrous, and the intermediate forms. Pubescence is, moreover, 
a character which in Lilacs varies with the age of the plant and is more in evidence 
in the spring than in late summer. 

According to Nakai (Tokyo Bot. Mag., 1. c.) his S. Palibiniana is closely 
related to S. velutina and to S. oblata Lindley, differing from the former in its 
broader and glabrous leaves and in the narrower lobes of the calyx, and from both 
species in the few-flowered inflorescence, and in the distinct bracts, and from 
S. oblata in the form of the stigma. It was described from a single specimen, no 
number is given, collected in September, 1 901, by Urbain Faurie in Korea, without 
precise locality, and named for Dr. I. Palibin. In his next description (Fl. Sylv. 
Kor. x. 51, 1921) Nakai modifies this description and states that the leaves of 
S. Palibiniana are glabrous above but pilose along the midrib and primary veins 
beneath. Of its occurrence he states: "Hab. in montibus Peninsulae praeter 
boreali- et australi-extremas." When at the Arnold Arboretum in 1924, Dr. Nakai 



140 THE LILAC 

determined as S. Palibiniana two herbarium specimens taken from cultivated 
plants (nos. 10,956, 11,704 Arn. Arb.) which were raised from seed (no. 9128) col- 
lected by E. H. Wilson in Korea in September, 191 7. In both of these specimens 
the leaves are pubescent above, while beneath they are pubescent and pilose along 
the midrib and primary veins. To me these examples appear to be intermediate, 
as far as their pubescent character is concerned, between the extremely pubescent 
plants of 5. velutina (no. 5473-1 Arn. Arb.) to which reference has already been 
made, and other plants, more nearly glabrous, which are growing in the Arboretum 
collection. From seed (no. 9320) collected by Wilson in Korea on September 21, 
191 7, were raised numerous plants (no. 10,955 Arn. Arb.) which are of good size 
and have bloomed for a number of years. Two of these, as can be seen upon 
herbarium material, are glabrous above and pilose merely on the midrib and primary 
veins beneath, — being close therefore to Nakai's 5. Palibiniana, — while a third 
is intermediate in amount of pubescence and belongs, strictly speaking, neither 
to S. velutina nor to S. Palibiniana, although it more nearly approaches the former. 

While it is probable that Mr. Wilson's seed (no. 9320) was collected from more 
than one plant, yet he tells me that in the field these were certainly adjacent and, 
according to his judgment at the time, of one species. In no important respect, 
other than in their pubescence, do the cultivated plants raised differ from one 
another. Mr. Wilson, who has had the opportunity to observe S. velutina and 5. 
Palibiniana growing spontaneously, is of the opinion that they represent extreme 
forms of one species, connected by intermediate examples. The Arboretum is 
fortunate in possessing in its herbarium sufficient wild and cultivated material to 
substantiate this opinion. 

Most of the spontaneous specimens collected by Mr. Wilson approach more 
nearly to the glabrous form; such are: no. 10,741, from the province of Keiki 
(fruit and foliage, September 24, 1918); no. 10,491, from the province of Kogen 
(flowers and foliage, July 6, 1918); and no. 8796, from the province of N. 
Heian (flowers and foliage, June 22, 191 7). Other specimens, however, such as no. 
9128 from the S. Kankyo and N. Heian divide (fruit and foliage, September 5, 
191 7), and no. 9320, from the province of Kogen (foliage, October 9, 191 7), more 
nearly approach, in their pubescence, the typical form of 5. velutina. 

In the catalogue of the Lemoine firm for 1922-1923 (no. 196, 20) S. Palibiniana 
appears as "A new species introduced from Korea by E. H. Wilson." 

In first describing his S. Kamibayashii, Dr. Nakai (Tokyo Bot. Mag., 1. c.) 
states that it is related to S. Fauriei [ = S. Palibiniana Nakai, not 5. Fauriei 
Leveille], but differs in its subrotundate leaves, in its densely flowered inflorescence, 
and in its acute or obtusish fruit marked with larger lenticels. He described his 
plant from a specimen, no number is given, collected by Keijiro Kamibayashi "in 
rupibus Dohosan" and states that its Japanese name is "Maruba-hashidoi." Later 
(Fl. Sylv. Kor., 1. c.) he reduces it to a variety of his 5. Palibiniana, a classification 
followed by Rehder (Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 1. c). In 5. velutina, and 



SYRINGA VELUTINA 141 

indeed in many of the species closely related to it, the form of the leaf varies so 
considerably that it is possible to find widely divergent examples; the size and 
density of the inflorescence also are variable and are presumably determined by soil, 
light, altitude, and other conditions; the fruit capsules also vary somewhat, possibly 
for the same reasons, in size and to a certain extent in form, some being longer, 
more slender, and marked with a slightly greater number of small lenticels than 
others. At their apex they vary from obtusish to acute or acuminate, and frequently, 
but not always, are terminated by a short, slender tip or beak. I consider that 
5. Palibiniana var. Kamibayashii, in the form of its leaves, in the density of its 
inflorescence, and in the form of its fruit, offers no characters sufficiently distinct 
to separate it from the extremely variable S. velutina. The specimens (nos. 10,712, 
10,664) collected by E. H. Wilson, in Korea (1917-1918), the former at Kongo san, 
province of Kogen, the latter at Pokadong, Unsan district, province of N. Heian, 
have been considered to represent this variety Kamibayashii. 

In first describing his 5. micrantha, Nakai states that it is intermediate between 
S. microphylla Diels and S. velutina Komarov, but differs from the former in its 
larger leaves and smaller flowers and from the latter in its three times smaller 
flowers. He described the species from a specimen collected by Masatomi Furumi 
(no. 65) in northern Korea, where it was common on the slopes of Ko sui in. Its 
Japanese name is given as "Hime-hashidoi". A fragment of a co-type specimen is 
in the Arnold Arboretum and was collected at Kosuin (Kankyonando Hasangun) 
in the province of N. Kankyo, on June 24, 1918. This specimen in its pubescent 
inflorescence and foliage approaches closely 5. velutina and I have found no character 
separating it as a distinct species. The flowers are small but, as already noted, 
this may be the result of soil or other conditions. 

Nakai, in describing S. venosa, relates it to his S. Fauriei [-S. Palibiniana 
Nakai, not S. Fauriei Leveille], but distinguished therefrom by its most glabrous 
branches and inflorescence, by its broader leaves with veins distinctly impressed 
above, — more noticeably so on living material. Its habitat is given as the island 
of Oryongto, Korea, and the species was described from specimens (nos. 4505 and 
4193-5) collected there by Nakai, and (no. 123) by Tsutomu Ishidoya. Its Japanese 
name is given as "Takeshima-hashidoi." I have not seen these specimens but others 
in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum, which, in company with Dr. Nakai, 
were collected by Mr. Wilson at Oryongto (Dagelet Island), in May, 191 7, (nos. 
8527 and 85 2 7 a) and which bear the determination S. venosa, do not differ in any 
important respect from S. velutina; the veins are not noticeably impressed nor are 
the leaves larger than those found on other specimens determined by Dr. Nakai 
as 5. Palibiniana. Moreover, for reasons already noted, the more glabrous branches, 
and inflorescence need not be considered in differentiating this species from 
S. velutina. 

Lingelsheim identifies with 5. velutina the species 5. Potanini Schneider from 
western China. While the two are without doubt closely related I have, because of 



142 THE LILAC 

the following differences, retained them as distinct species. In S. Potanini the corolla- 
tube is long, slender, and cylindric; the anthers, judging from herbarium material, 
are yellow, and, with rare exceptions, inserted just above the middle of the corolla- 
tube ; in form the corolla-lobes are commonly long, narrow, and cucullate and they 
expand at a right angle to the corolla-tube and curl backward. In S. velutina the 
corolla-tube is funnelform with a wide throat; the anthers are bluish and are 
inserted just below the mouth of the corolla-tube; the corolla-lobes are short, broad 
at their base and narrow abruptly to an acute or obtuse apex; they remain more or 
less upright though finally expanding to a right angle with the corolla-tube and, 
as they fade, sometimes curl backward. The foliage of 5. Potanini is densely gray- 
villous-pubescent beneath while that of S. velutina even in its most pubescent form 
is not conspicuously so. As noted under S. Potanini it is possible that these two 
Lilacs, geographically widely separated, may, by the discovery of intermediate 
plants, at some future time be classified as extreme forms of one species. 

Wild plants of this species have produced white flowers. Dr. Nakai (Tokyo 
Bot. Mag., 1. c.) first noted a variety, which he calls 5. villosa var. lactea, distin- 
guished by its white flowers and bright green calyx. Its habitat is given as southern 
Korea, Mt. Chirisan, where it was collected by Nakai, no number is given, on July 
i, 1913, at an altitude of 1200 meters. Later (Tokyo Bot. Mag., 1. c.) he classifies 
S. villosa Nakai, not Vahl, as a synonym of S. Fauriei Leveille and mentions this 
white variety as 5. Fauriei var. lactea Nakai. He notes here that the corolla-tube 
is 10-13 mm - l° n g> an d the plant's Japanese name "Shirobana-chosen-hashidoi." 
Its habitat is again given as Mt. Chirisan (T. Nakai no. 381). As already noted 
Nakai (Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 51, 192 1) cites as a synonym of his S. Palibiniana, S. 
Fauriei Nakai, not Leveille, therefore the 5. Fauriei var. lactea Nakai is identical 
with the S. Palibiniana var. lactea Nakai (Tokyo Bot. Mag., 1. c). Again (Tokyo 
Bot. Mag., 1. c.) Nakai mentions a S. venosa var. lactea Nakai which he had collected 
(no. 4192) on the cliffs of the island of Oryongto, Korea. I have included in 
5. velutina Nakai's two species S. Palibiniana and S. venosa, and also this white 
variety which is rather doubtful and not in cultivation. 

In the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum are four specimens, three of flowers 
and foliage and one of fruit and foliage, (no. 8602) collected by E. H. Wilson in 
June, 1917, at the French mine, Taiyudo, province of N. Heian, Korea, at an 
altitude of 330-1000 meters. The shrub is described as 5-10 ft. tall, with white 
to pale lilac, very fragrant flowers, abundant in woods and thickets. Mr. Wilson 
noted these as a white flowered variety of S. velutina but his short description calls 
them "white to pale lilac." The flowers of S. velutina fade to an exceedingly pale 
lilac or to almost white and it is doubtful whether the white flowered variety can be 
considered to be very distinct. In their pubescence these specimens more nearly 
approach the glabrous than the extremely pubescent examples of S. velutina. 

A photograph (Arn. Arb. no. 898) of the bark of this species which was 
taken by C. K. Schneider in 1915-1919 is in the Arboretum collection. It 



SYRINGA VELUTINA 143 

represents one of the plants (Arn. Arb. no. 5473-1) long grown under the name 
S. Koehneana. 

In habit 5\ velutina differs considerably from S. microphylla Diels, another 
species to which it is closely related. The latter is of slenderer growth, producing 
each year long "whispy" branchlets; its flower-clusters appear from a great number 
of lateral buds on the same branchlet, causing it to bend gracefully under the weight. 
In S. microphylla the corolla-tube is cylindric, not funnelform as in 5. velutina, 
and the anthers are inserted near the middle of the corolla-tube, rather than near 
the mouth as in S. velutina. Nor does S. velutina show any tendency to bloom 
twice in the same season as does the species S. microphylla. 

In the Arnold Arboretum the two old plants (no. 5473-1 Arn. Arb.) of S. 
velutina to which reference has already been made are not heavy bloomers. They 
are broad-spreading, well-foliaged shrubs. The more recently acquired plants, 
raised from Mr. Wilson's seed (no. 9320 and 9128), up to the present time appear 
to be of more compact habit, and bloom more abundantly, possibly because of 
their more open and sunnier situation. Their flower-clusters are well filled, of 
good size, and have an exceedingly pleasant fragrance. S. velutina appears to be 
entirely hardy in the neighborhood of Boston, Massachusetts. 

Goeze mentions 5. velutina as growing at Plantieres [the Simon-Louis Nurseries 
near Metz] in 1907; this is undoubtedly S. tomentella. See S. tomentella. 

"Standardized Plant Names" has adopted as approved common name for 
S. Koehneana, which they retain as a species, Schneider Lilac; of S. velutina they 
state that "the name S. velutina is often misapplied to S. Koehneana." This 
reference is undoubtedly to S. velutina Hort., here given as a synonym of S. 
Koehneana Schneider [ = 5. velutina]. Since the approved common name of Ko- 
marov Lilac, which might appropriately have been applied to the species S. velutina, 
has already been used- by Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey as approved common name 
for S. Komarowi, it would seem, according to my classification, that a common 
name such as Korean Lilac might have more significance than Schneider Lilac, the 
name adopted. The same work also retains S. Palibiniana as a species. 

Mr. F. L. Skinner of Dropmore, Manitoba, Canada, has attempted to cross 
this species and 5. pubescens. See S. pubescens Turczaninov. 



SYRINGA POTANINI 

Syringa Potanini Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. ix. 80 (1910); 111. Handb. Laub- 
holzk. 11. 777, figs. 487 1-m, 488 a-c, s-u (191 1); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 
229 (1911); in Sargent, PI. Wilson. 1. 297 (1912). — Wilson, Naturalist in western China, 
1. 184 (1913). — Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 173 (1916). — A. 0[sborn] 
in Garden, lxxxvii. 301 (1923). — Notes Bot. Gard. Edinburgh, xrv. 144, 163, 273 (PI. 
Chin. Forrest.) (1924). — O. S[tapf] in Bot. Mag. cl. t. 9060 (1924). — Stares, Cerines 
(Syringa L.), 4, 21 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). — Rehder, Man. Cult. 
Trees and Shrubs, 754 (1927); in Jour. Arnold Arb. ix. 109 (1928). 

Syringa sp. (F[arrer] 330) Farrer in Jour. Hort. Soc. London, xliii. 112 (1916). 
Syringa velutina Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 86 (1920), in part, as 
to the synonym S. Potanini Schneider. — Not Komarov. 

A shrub to 18 ft. in height; branchlets short-pubescent. Leaves broad-elliptic to 
oblong-elliptic, sometimes rhombic, suborbicular or obovate, 1-2% in. long, 3^-i% in- 
broad, acuminate, short-acuminate or obtuse, base cuneate or broadly cuneate, rarely 
rounded, rather densely pubescent with short stiff hairs above, densely light-gray villous- 
pubescent beneath; petiole Vi6 _3 /i6 in. long, villous-pubescent. Inflorescence from 
lateral buds, sometimes fascicled, upright, 3-7 in. long, 2-3 in. broad; rhachis short- 
pubescent; pedicel subsessile or up to x /i6 in. long, short-pubescent; calyx short-pubes- 
cent or sometimes pilose, margin undulate or with short, acute, or rounded teeth; corolla- 
tube slender, cylindric, % in. long; corolla-lobes spreading at a right angle to corolla- 
tube or curling backward, commonly long, narrow, cucullate, usually with a pronounced 
hook; corolla Y% in. in diameter; anthers usually small, rarely }/g in. long, inserted 
just above the middle of corolla-tube, rarely inserted slightly higher and just reaching 
the mouth. Capsule oblong, lustrous, smooth or sometimes minutely and slightly verru- 
cose, % in. long, acuminate. 

Habitat: China: provinces of Kansu; Szechuan; Yunnan. 

C. K. Schneider first described Syringa Potanini from a specimen collected on 
June 18, 1885, by G. A. Potanin at the river Tschi lo ku in the mountains of south- 
eastern Kansu, China. According to Bretschneider (Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. 
China, 1013, 1898) who traces Potanin's expeditions with accuracy, this collector 
was, on June 18, 1885, at T'an ch'ang, a little town on the northern affluent of the 
Hei shui kiang River. This town, spelt also Tanchang, is in the mountains south 
of the Tsin ling Range and southeast of Min, or Minchow. 

Schneider describes 5. Potanini as a shrub up to 12 ft. tall, in habit resembling 
S. pubescens but differing from it in the ovate-elliptic leaves, 3-6.5 cm. long, 1.7-3.2 
cm. broad, green, minutely pilose above, almost silvery pubescent beneath, at the 

144 



SYRINGA POTANINI 145 

apex more or less acuminate ; the pedicels [ = petioles] 2-4 (-5) mm. long ; the in- 
florescences up to 9 cm. long, loose, in all parts short-pilose; flowers whitish-lilac 
(?); corolla-tube about 11 mm. long, calyx 1.5-2 mm. long with truncate margin, 
pedicels almost lacking; anthers deep violet; fruit unknown. 

In 191 1 Schneider considers it closely related to S. Dielsiana Schneider, now 
considered to be identical with S. microphylla Diels. 

In 1 91 2 he identified with S. Potanini two specimens collected by E. H. Wilson 
in western Szechuan. One (no. 4080 a) of flowers, was gathered in May, 1904, 
at Tachien lu, or Ta tsien lu, while Mr. Wilson was collecting for Messrs. James 
Veitch and Sons; the second (no. 2583), was taken from a bush 6-10 ft. tall, with 
rose-purple flowers. It came from Monkong ting, descent of Hsao chin ho, at 
an altitude of 7000-9000 ft. and was found in June, 1908, during Mr. Wilson's 
expedition for the Arnold Arboretum. Of these specimens Schneider writes: 
"... Wilson's specimens seem to differ from the type, of which I have seen mature 
leaves, only in the larger inflorescence attaining 13 cm. in length." 

Reginald Farrer, collecting in 1914 near the Tibetan border in southeastern 
Kansu, found a Lilac which he lists as no. 330 and described as follows: "... a 
tall, slender, and very graceful Lilac of 6-8 feet, which I have only once seen, far 
up, on the shady side in a collateral of the great Siku gorge, growing in a big colony 
amid blocks of mossy detritus from cliff-wall overhead. Its flower, so far as I 
could judge it at the end of June, seemed small and rather poor, in small insignificant 
panicles; it may however improve in cultivation." 0. Stapf, in the "Botanical 
Magazine" for 1924, gives a colored plate which was taken from a plant grown from 
seed (no. 330) collected by Farrer; it was cultivated in the "chalk-garden at High- 
down near Goring-on-Sea, Sussex" belonging to Major F. Stern. Stapf writes, 
referring to Farrer's description just quoted: ". . . it may be that the 'insignificant' 
panicles were merely the last of the season. At any rate the inflorescences of the 
plant raised by Major Stern from Farrer's seed hardly warrant the term 'insig- 
nificant.' I have not been able to identify this lilac with any species now in 
cultivation, but I have come to the conclusion that it is the same plant which the 
Russian explorer Potanin collected nearly thirty years before in the same district, 
but fifteen miles to the north and at a higher level (2,200 to 2,300 m.), and which 
Camillo Schneider named after him Syringa Potanini. Potanin gives the date as 
June 18 (Old Style), that is the first day of July of our calendar, and the locality 
as Tan'chang, a village to the south of Minchow, in the deeply dissected loess- 
country of Southern Kansu. He says nothing about the colour of the flower of 
his plant and the dried specimens are so far discoloured that it is unsafe to predict 
on this point, but the dark purple calyx and the faintly purple anthers suggest 
the presence of more anthocyanine in the corolla than occurs in Major Stern's plant. 
In every other respect Potanin's and Farrer's plants agree sufficiently to suggest 
their specific identity, although they may represent slightly distinct colour-strains. 
The extent to which the shape of the leaves varies — often on the same branch — 



146 THE LILAC 

is remarkable, but the characteristic pubescence — very few and minute hairs 
on the upper side which indeed often appears glabrous to the naked eye, and a 
conspicuous silvery-greyish down on the underside — is always the same whatever 
the shape or size of the leaf. In this respect 5*. Polanini much resembles S. tomentella 
... no doubt its nearest ally. It differs from it in the scanty and minute pubes- 
cence of the upper side of the leaves, in the slender corollas and their relatively long 
and narrow lobes, and also in the colour of the flowers. 6*. Potanini is perfectly 
hardy in this country. . ." Although in the text Stapf states that the anthers of 
this species are "faintly purple," in his botanical description he describes them as 
"faintly purplish, yellow or whitish, or the connective orange." Their color, so 
far as I have been able to learn from the examination of herbarium specimens, is 
yellow. Schneider in first describing the species states that they are dark violet; 
later he describes them as rose, and after the examination of the Wilson specimens, 
he writes: "The anthers of S. Potanini are yellow as in the nearly allied S. Dielsiana 
Schneider, and not violet or distinctly rosy as indicated by me in the original 
description. The only hitherto known species with dark violet anthers are S. 
pubescens Turczaninow and S. Jidianae Schneider." Among the Lilacs closely 
related to S. Potanini, this species is, in this particular, exceptional, for, in addition 
to the two Lilacs mentioned by Schneider, S. velutina, S. microphylla, and S. Meyeri 
have all bluish anthers. In relating S. Potanini to S. tomentella Dr. Stapf places 
it in the wrong group of Lilacs, for the latter produces its flower-panicles, which 
are leafy at their base, from terminal buds, while the former produces them from 
lateral buds and they are not borne on leafy shoots. 

In "Plantae Chinenses Forrestianae" are listed three specimens of 5. Potanini 
which were collected by George Forrest in Yunnan; all are represented in the 
herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum and with the exception of slight differences 
later noted, these resemble in every respect not only the type, of which there is a 
small fragment in the same herbarium, but also the specimens collected in Szechuan 
by E. H. Wilson. The collector's notes upon these three specimens, all identified 
with S. Potanini, read as follows: "No. 20135 . . . Shrub of 6-12 ft. Flowers white, 
flushed purple exterior, fragrant. In thickets by streams on the Yang-dza Shan, 
Mekong-Salwin divide. Lat. 28 18' N. Long. 98 43' E. Alt. 7-8,000 ft. March, 
1 92 1. N. W. Yunnan"; "No. 20336. . . Shrub of 9-18 ft. In fruit. Open, dry 
situations on the Mekong-Salwin divide. Lat. 28 20' N. Long. 98 43' E. Alt. 
7-8,000 ft. Sept. 1921. N. W. Yunnan"; "No. 21606 . . . Shrub of 8-16 ft. Flowers 
fragrant, pale creamy-rose. In thickets by streams on the Yangtze-Mekong divide, 
near Da-mu-chong. Lat. 27 18' N. Long. 99°48' E. Alt. 8,000 ft. March 1922. 
N. W. Yunnan." Other Forrest specimens, of which there are also examples in 
the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum and which must be identified with this 
species, are nos. 14,157, 16,329, 16,348 and 17,237. On the two first of these is writ- 
ten "5. Potaninii Schneider vel aff[inis]"; I cannot see that they differ from typical 
S. Potanini. They were collected in Yunnan but no locality is given. S. Potanini 



SYRINGA POTANINI 147 

was also collected in 1923 by J. F. Rock (no. 8710) on the mountains above Tseku 
and Tsehchung, Mekong-Salween watershed, in northwestern Yunnan. This is 
in the same herbarium. 

Lingelsheim considers typical S. Potanini, the specimen of which he has seen, 
to be identical with S. velutina; he does not state that he has seen the Wilson 
specimens which Schneider determined as identical with typical S. Potanini. I 
have found between the two species, which are undoubtedly nearly related, certain 
differences. In S. Potanini, and judging only from dried material as already 
stated, the anthers are yellow and are inserted as a rule just above the middle of 
the corolla- tube; in length they are ordinarily Vi6 of an inch; in two of the Forrest 
specimens (nos. 21,606 and 16,348) they are Vs in. long, and because of their greater 
length reach to the mouth of the corolla-tube. In 5*. velutina the anthers are 
bluish, and are inserted near the mouth of the corolla-tube. With the exception 
of the two Forrest specimens of 5. Potanini just noted, where the corolla-lobes are 
slightly broader and less cucullate, I have found them to be narrow with a pro- 
nounced hook; after being expanded for a short time they curl backward. The 
corolla-tube is long, slender and cylindric. In S. velutina the corolla-lobes are 
broad at their base and narrow abruptly near the apex to a sometimes cucullate 
tip; they remain for a considerable time more or less upright, finally expanding to 
a right angle with the corolla-tube, only sometimes and as they fade, showing a 
tendency to curl backward. The corolla-tube is funnelform, with a wide throat. 
The foliage of S. Potanini is densely gray-villous-pubescent beneath while that of 
S. velutina, even in its most pubescent form, is not so conspicuously so to the 
naked eye. In both species the fruit capsules are very similar. The two are closely 
related and it is possible that intermediate forms may eventually bridge the great 
territorial distance which intervenes and permit their classification as extreme forms 
of one species. 



SYRINGA RUGULOSA 
Syringa rugulosa McKelvey in Jour. Arnold Arb. vi. 153 (1925). 

A shrub about six ft. tall or a small tree; branchlets with dense villous tomentum 
persisting to the second year. Leaves ovate or elliptic, 1^-2% in. long, Y^-^A in. 
broad, acuminate or acute, base cuneate, with margins often slightly irregularly undulate, 
densely villous and rugulose, with midrib, veins and veinlets impressed above, densely 
soft-villous, with midrib and 4-6 pairs of veins conspicuously raised beneath; petiole 
Vi6 _3 /i6 in. l° n g) densely villous. Flowers subsessile, fascicled, in lateral or some 
times terminal panicles, 2^-4% in. long; rhachis densely villous; calyx campanulate, 
densely villous, mostly distinctly dentate, with ovate-triangular, acute, or acuminate 
teeth; corolla-tube slender, cylindric, V^- 1 /* in. long, corolla-lobes ovate, Vie-Vs in. long, 
acutish or sometimes cucullate; stamens inserted slightly below the mouth; anthers not 
extending beyond the mouth. Fruit unknown. 

Habitat : China : province of Yunnan. 

This species was described from a specimen (no. 169) in the herbarium of the 
Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, which, through the courtesy of the Regius 
Keeper, was sent for examination to the Arnold Arboretum. It was collected by 
E. E. Maire in July, 1914, in the undergrowth of the mountains at Tchao ho in 
Yunnan, at an altitude of about 9000 feet. The collector's notes describe it as an 
"arbuste buissonnant," about 6 ft. tall, with rose-violet flowers. 

Another specimen (no. 503) of this Lilac, collected by Maire in June, no year is 
given, is in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum. It came from the mountains 
of Te long tsin, Yunnan, and was growing at an altitude of 9,000 ft. The color 
of the flowers is noted as white. 

This species is most nearly related to S. Potanini Schneider which differs in 
the not distinctly rugulose leaves, less densely pubescent branchlets and inflores- 
cence, in the minute, appressed pubescence of the usually truncate calyx, in the 
longer and narrower corolla-lobes and in the stamens being usually inserted much 
below the mouth. As far as it is possible to judge from herbarium material the 
color of the anthers in both S. Potanini and S. rugulosa is yellow. 

S. rugulosa is not in cultivation and needs further study. 



148 



SYRINGA PINETORUM 

Syringa pinetorum W. W. Smith in Notes Bot. Gard. Edinburgh, rx. 132 (1916). — 
Rehder, Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 754 (1927). 

A shrub 4-8 ft. tall; branchlets slender, pilose to tomentose; young leafy shoots densely 
pilose. Leaves thin in texture, ovate to ovate-lanceolate, acute, abruptly acuminate or 
acuminate, base cuneate, slightly pilose or glabrous above, paler, pilose on the veins 
beneath, %-^A in. long, Yr^A in. broad, with 3-5 pairs of slender primary veins, spread- 
ing, slightly raised, margins ciliolate; petiole Vie -1 /* m - lo n g> slender, pilose. Flowers 
sub-sessile, frequently fascicled, in pyramidate panicles 2-4 in. long, 2 in. broad or less; 
calyx glabrous, cup-shaped, with sometimes ciliolate margins and deeply cut teeth; 
corolla-tube slender, cylindric, x /i~Y% in. long; corolla-lobes rounded or acute at apex, 
sometimes cucullate, expanding at a right angle to corolla- tube ; corolla 3 /i6- 5 /i6 in. in 
diameter; anthers inserted slightly above the middle of corolla-tube. Fruit unknown. 

Habitat: China: province of Yunnan. 

Syringa pinetorum was described by W. W. Smith from a specimen (no. 12,472) 
collected in June, 1914, by George Forrest "in open pine forests on the Lichiang 
Range, Yunnan," at an altitude of 10,000 to 11,000 ft., and at Lat. 27 40' N. The 
collector records that it was a shrub 4-8 ft. tall, with pale lavender-rose flowers. 
Professor Smith notes that it is a species with small leaves related to S. microphylla 
Diels though differing in the shorter petioles and in the glabrous calyx with some- 
what longer ciliolate teeth. He describes it as a shrub 3 to 9 feet tall, younger 
branches densely spreading gray-pilose, older branches glabrescent, gray; the 
leaves 2-3.5 cm - l° n g> I-I -5 cm - broad, ovate, rarely lanceolate-ovate or sub- 
elliptic, apex acute or rarely obtuse, more or less rounded at the base, above spar- 
ingly pilose or glabrous with ciliolate margins, beneath paler, with somewhat 
long, white pilose hairs along the midrib and veins, elsewhere glabrous; veins 3-4 
pairs, conspicuous or reticulate beneath; petiole 2-5 mm. long, pilose; the inflores- 
cences 10-18 cm. long, 7-8 cm. broad, erect, somewhat loose, more or less densely 
white-pilose; pedicels very short, about 1 mm. long or almost lacking; flowers 
pale-lavender-rose according to the collector; calyx about 2 mm. long, divided for 
a third or a fourth part of its length into triangular teeth, glabrous except for 
ciliolate teeth ; tube of corolla 8-9 mm. long, toward the apex slightly dilated ; lobes 
oblong to obtusish, 3 mm. long; anthers inserted in the upper part of the tube but 
hardly reaching the mouth of the corolla; fruit unknown. 

Through the courtesy of the Regius Keeper of the Royal Botanic Garden, 
Edinburgh, a co-type specimen was sent to the Arnold Arboretum for examination. 

149 



150 THE LILAC 

Upon this the ciliolate character of the calyx teeth appears but rarely; if this 
character is more prominent on the type specimen it would seem to relate the 
species more closely to S. microphylla than had it been entirely glabrous. The 
length of the petioles is variable and to me does not appear of sufficient impor- 
tance to distinguish S. pinetorum as a species. 

The anthers of .5. microphylla are a bluish gray color, as are those of S. Julianae } 
another Lilac to which 5. pinetorum is closely related. Examination of the anthers 
of dried specimens shows that those of 5. pinetorum are yellow. In this the species 
resembles S. Potanini, another Lilac which has been found in Yunnan. The posi- 
tion of the anthers in these two species, as well as the form of their flowers is the 
same. 5. pinetorum is less pubescent than S. Potanini both in foliage and in- 
florescence, but in this group of Lilacs pubescence appears to be very variable. 
The fruit of S. pinetorum I have not seen. 

The Lilacs in the group in which S. pinetorum is classified are in many respects 
similar and certain of them, such as S. pinetorum, S. rugulosa, S. Wardii and S. 
Giraldiana, need to be better known, both from additional herbarium material and 
as living plants, before their classification as distinct species, or their identity with 
better known species, can be felt to be satisfactorily determined. 

There are in cultivation in this country plants bearing the name S. pinetorum, 
which were propagated at the Arnold Arboretum from seed collected by Forrest 
and distributed by the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh. These plants are 
clearly S. yunnanensis. A year after the seed was received, the Arboretum also was 
sent from the same source a number of seedling plants, presumably raised in 
Edinburgh from the same lot of seed. One of these (Arn. Arb. no. 18,341) is also 
S. yunnanensis. 



Plate LXXIV 





f'^i 




SYRINGA MICROPHYLLA 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 7199) 

Winter buds, enlarged. January, 1926. 



Plate LXXV 






SYRINGA MICROPHYLLA 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 7199) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. April 30, 1926. 



Plate LXXVI 




< 

x 
a, 
o 
« 



< 

s 

CO 






5J 



OJ 



§ | 



t: o 



O 



< P 



fcfi 



Plate LXXVII 




< 

►J 

w 

a, 
o 

en 
o 






o 



o 



g < 



g T3 

2 ° 






oo 

M 

ed 



(/J 

3 






0) 

o 






Plate LXXVIII 




SYRINGA MICROPHYLLA 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 7199) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked August, 1924. 



Plate LXXTX 




■MMVB 



SYRINGA MICROPHYLLA 

Syringa microphylla Diels in Bot. Jahrb. xxrx. 531 (1901). — Smith in Hemsley in 
Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxxvi. 524 (Ind. Fl. Sin. in.) (1903-1905). — Schneider in 
Wien. HI. Gartenz. xxvm. 101 (1903); in Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 82, p. 87 (1905); 
HI. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 778, figs. 486 z-z 2 , 487 n-p (1911); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. 
Ges. no. 20, 227, 229 (1911); in Sargent, PL Wilson, m. 453 (1917). — Sargent 
in Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. 1. 28 (1915); in. 64 (1917); rv. 26 (1918); vi. 34 (1920); 
vni. 23 (1922). — Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 172 (1916). — Lingelsheim 
in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 86, fig. 5 (1920). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, 
Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 404 (1922). — Dunbar in Florists Exch. September 22, 
1923, 799. — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923). — Stares, 
Cerines (Syringa L.), 4, 21 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, n. (1926). — Rehder, 
Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 754 (1927); in Jour. Arnold Arb. ix. 109 (1928). 

Syringa persica Kanitz in Ertek. termesz. korebol, Magyar Tudom. Akad. Class m., 
vol. xv. no. 2, 8 (1885); in Math. Naturw. Ber. Ungarn, in. 7 (1886); in Szechenyi, 
Keletazs. Utjan. Tudom. Ered. n. 824 (Noven. Gyujtes. Ered. 37) (1891); in 
Szechenyi, Wissensch. Ergeb. Reise Ostas. n. 715 (1898). — Not Linnaeus. 

Syringa pubescens var. tibetica Batalin in Act. Hort. Petrop. xm. 378 (1894). — Schneider 
in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. rx. 80 (1910); 111. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 776 (1911). — 
Bretschneider, Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 1030 (1898). — Stares, Cerines 
(Syringa L.), 20 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, n. (1926). 

Syringa villosa Diels in Bot. Jahrb. xxrx. 532 (1901). — Not Vahl. 

Syringa pubescens var., Smith in Hemsley in Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxxvi. 524 (Ind. Fl. 
Sin. in.) (1903-1905). 

Syringa Dielsiana Schneider in Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 82, p. 88 (1905); in Mitt. 
Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 227, 229 (191 1); 111. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 778, figs. 
487 g-k, 488 a-d (1911). — Pampanini in Nuov. Giorn. Ital. n. s. xvn. 690 (1910). — 
Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 4, 21 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

Syringa tsinlingsana Schneider in Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 82, p. 88 (1905), name 
only; and on Giraldi specimen no. 7193 (as Syringa tsinglingsana) . 

Syringa microphylla var. glabriuscula Schneider in Sargent, PI. Wilson. 1. 301 (191 2). 

Syringa Dielsiana Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 85 (1920), in part, 
as a synonym of 5. pubescens Turczaninov. 

Syringa Schneideri Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 86 (1920). 

A small, spreading shrub to 5 ft. or more tall; broader than tall; branches spreading 
or upright, glabrous, smooth, lenticellate; branchlets slender, pubescent, puberulous or 
sometimes glabrous, lenticellate, sometimes tinged Burnt Umber (xxvm.). Winter- 
buds ovoid or globose with acute apex, flower bud 3 /i 6 in. long more or less, scales dark 
brown with narrow reddish margins, lustrous, abruptly acuminate, keeled, pubescent. 
Leaf-scar much raised, shallow shield-shaped, conspicuous, small; bundle-trace slightly 

151 



152 THE LILAC 

curved. Leaves orbicular-ovate to elliptic-ovate, sometimes orbicular, H -2 /^ in. long, 
M _ iM in. broad, acute or acuminate, sometimes obtuse, base somewhat cuneate or 
rounded, ciliolate, dark green, glabrous or slightly pilose above, paler, pubescent, puberu- 
lous, or glabrous except on veins near base beneath; petiole Ye -6 / 12 in. long, glabrous 
or puberulous, sometimes tinged Burnt Umber (xxvin.). Inflorescence sometimes 
leafy, lateral, upright, sometimes fascicled, ^-3 in. long, %-z in. broad; rhachis pubes- 
cent, puberulous or glabrous, sometimes tinged Burnt Umber (xxvin.); pedicel short, 
pubescent, puberulous or glabrous, sometimes tinged Burnt Umber (xxvin.); calyx 
short, densely pubescent, puberulous or glabrous, with short, usually acute, sometimes 
rounded teeth, rarely truncate, sometimes tinged Burnt Umber (xxvm.); corolla-tube 
slender, cylindric, K~M in. long; corolla-lobes expanding at right angles to corolla-tube, 
pointed, cucullate; corolla \i in. in diameter, color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Helle- 
bore Red to Tourmaline Pink to Laelia Pink (xxxvin.); when expanded Pale Laelia 
Pink (xxxvin.) marked with white without, white within; anthers Light Vinaceous- 
Drab (xlv.), inserted slightly above the middle of corolla-tube. Capsule oblong, slender, 
V2- 7 /i2 in. long, acuminate, rarely obtuse, verrucose. (The notes on the color of the 
flowers were taken from a plant (no. 7199) growing in the Arnold Arboretum. 

Habitat: China: provinces of Shensi; Shansi; Hupeh; Honan; Kansu. 

Syringa micro phylla was first described in 1901 by Ludwig Diels in his work 
"Die Flora von Central-China," which appeared in Engler's "Botanische Jahr- 
bticher." He states that all new or young growth is short-pilose, the petiole slender, 
the blade small, broad-ovate, at base scarcely narrowed, obtuse or acuminate, 
above deep green, beneath pale glabrescent, on both sides and especially beneath 
short-pilose with reticulate veins, the calyx campanulate, very short-dentate, 
pilose; the fruit short-stalked, conical-spindle-shaped, acute at apex, scarcely 
compressed, verrucose. The pedicels 6-8 mm. long; the blade 2.5-3 by 1.5-2 cm. 
large; the panicles 5-7 cm. long; the calyx 1-1.5 by 0.7 mm. large; the fruit 15 by 
4 mm. large. The description was based upon two fruiting specimens (nos. 1644, 
1645) collected by the Italian missionary, the Rev. Giuseppe Giraldi, in the province 
of Shensi, China. 

Dr. R. Pampanini kindly sent me, on December 1, 1926, a complete record of 
all the Giraldi specimens in the Biondi- Giraldi Herbarium in the Botanical Museum, 
Florence, Italy, with their notations. He writes: "The Rev. Giraldi sent all his 
collections here to our Botanical Museum. Only to the Botanical Museum of 
Berlin we have once given duplicates. . . the whole collection is here." The nota- 
tion upon the first of the specimens (no. 1644) cited by Diels states that the plant 
was found at "Tui-kio-shan, monti del Lao-y-huo" in northern Shensi in October, 
1896. Upon the second (no. 1645) tne locality is noted as "Quasi sulla cima del 
Tui-kio-san a sud di Si-ngan-fu"; this is also in northern Shensi and the date is 
given as September, 1893. Fragments and photographs of these two specimens 
were sent me by Dr. Pampanini. 

Schneider four years later, also writing in Engler's "Botanische Jahrbucher" 



SYRINGA M1CR0PHYLLA 153 

enlarged upon Diels' description which he was enabled to do after the examination 
of thirteen additional Giraldi specimens, nine of which were of flowers. All were 
gathered in northern Shensi and the dates upon which they were collected, as sent 
me by Dr. Pampanini, were as follows: no. 739 (of which there were two specimens), 
in May, 1892; no. 4388, in July, 1894; no. 742, in August, 1894; nos. 4391, 740, in 
May, 1895; nos. 4389, 4390, in September, 1897; nos. 4392, 4393, 4394, 4400, in 
May, 1899; and no. 7192, in May, 1900. I have not seen any of these sheets. 

At the same time Schneider described a new species, S. Dielsiana Schneider, 
from two specimens also collected by Giraldi in northern Shensi. One of these 
(no. 7193) was of flowers, and the inscription states that it was collected on July 
10, 1900, "in montibus Tsin-ling-san." The second (no. 741) was of fruit (which 
is noted as obtuse), and was collected on August 29, 1895, at "Monte Hua-san, 
presso Gniu-ju." Of these only the latter belongs to this species according to 
Lingelsheim who classifies the former (no. 7193) as 5. pubescens, citing as a synonym 
the 5. tsinglingsana [sic] of Schneider. Fragments and photographs of these two 
specimens were sent me by Dr. Pampanini. Upon the number 7193 he noted: 
"Certamente non e le S. Dielsiana." The short corolla-tube, in .5. pubescens 
considerably longer, and the small leaves differing little in form or in pubescence 
from those of S. microphylla (in which I include 5. Dielsiana), satisfy me that this 
specimen represents S. microphylla and not 5. pubescens Turczaninov. There is 
no record, either according to notes upon the Giraldi specimens sent me by Dr. 
Pampanini or according to labels on the specimen, that Schneider recorded there 
his determination and name, S. Dielsiana. On the label he gives the name as 
S. tsinglingsana but elsewhere as S. tsinlingsana. I believe this name to be 
synonymous with his S. Dielsiana [ =S. microphylla] not with S. pubescens. 

Later (111. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 778, 191 1) Schneider included under S. 
Dielsiana Wilson's flowering specimen (no. 2024) from western Hupeh and [Dr. 
Augustine] Henry's fruiting specimen (no. 6985) from Hupeh. I have seen a co- 
type specimen in the Gray Herbarium; the S. villosa of Diels is based on this 
Henry specimen (no. 6985). Still later (PI. Wilson. 111. 433, 191 7) Schneider com- 
bined S. Dielsiana with ,5. microphylla, writing: "To this species belongs Wilson's 
specimen from western Hupeh, June, 1901 (Veitch Exped. No. 2024). S. micro- 
phylla is in cultivation in this Arboretum, where plants were raised from seeds 
collected by Purdom (no. 583). ..." A co-type specimen is in the Arnold Arbo- 
retum herbarium. 

According to Dr. Bretschneider (Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 774, 1898) 
Dr. Augustine Henry was, in 1882, appointed Medical Officer and Assistant at 
Ichang in the province of Hupeh; he remained there from April, 1882, to April, 
1889; "it was here he began, in 1885, to collect plants, with the idea of identifying 
Chinese names of trees, herbs, medicines, etc., with their scientific appellations. 
His first collection was sent to the Kew Gardens in the spring of 1886." 

Dr. R. Pampanini named as S. Dielsiana a specimen (no. 1805) collected in 



154 THE LILAC 

August, 1907, by P. C. Silvestri at Ou tan scian, in Hupeh, at an altitude of 2050 
meters. He very kindly sent me fragments and a photograph of this specimen. 
Lingelsheim also cites it as an example of S. microphylla. 

In 1912 (PI. Wilson. I. 310, 1912) Schneider described for the first time Syringa 
microphylla var. glabriuscula, differing, he notes, from the type in its almost glabrous 
or glabrous, nearly toothless, calyx. This variety was based upon one part (b) 
of a specimen collected in 1898 by the Rev. Frjater] Hugh [Scallan] at Mt. Miao 
uan san, in northern Hupeh. This is in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum 
and was received with two other Scallan specimens from the herbarium of the 
British Museum; all are from north Central China; the remainder of this Scallan 
material Schneider noted as typical S. microphylla. In the same publication five 
years later Schneider writes: "This variety is scarcely distinct and is connected 
by many intermediate forms with the type. ..." 

Lingelsheim bases upon Wilson's specimen no. 2024, already noted, a new species, 
S. Schneideri Lingelsheim. Upon examination this does not appear to differ from 
typical S. microphylla. 

The S. pubescens var. tibetica of Batalin was founded upon a flowering specimen 
in the herbarium of the Imperial Botanic Garden, St. Petersburg, collected on 
May 7, 1885, by G. A. Potanin near the town of Hui dui, district of Amdo, in 
western Kansu, China, where it was growing at an altitude of 7200 ft. The leaves 
are described as ovate, obtuse, subcordate or slightly narrowed at the base, slightly 
pilosiusculous along the midvein beneath, ciliate; the young shoots, the flower 
cluster, pedicel and calyx as densely pubescent, the teeth of the calyx as triangular. 
Schneider's description of this variety is based upon the same herbarium specimen 
and he was uncertain whether another description had already appeared, writing 
"an jam descripta?." Bretschneider mentions it among new plants discovered by 
Potanin, and Miss M. Smith (Hemsley, Ind. Fl. Sin. m.) lists it without description 
among plants which have been "noted since the publication of the 'Enumeration'." 
In the Arnold Arboretum is a co-type specimen. I refer this variety to 5. micro- 
phylla because of the character of the pubescence of the leaves (in S. pubescens this 
is long villose along the midrib, in S. microphylla short pubescent) ; because of the 
densely pubescent calyx (frequently present in S. microphylla and rarely in S. 
pubescens) ; and because of the pubescence of the branchlets, petioles and inflores- 
cence (in S. pubescens as a rule glabrous). As stated under S. pubescens the two 
species are very similar; the corolla- tube in S. pubescens is very long but on speci- 
mens of S. microphylla we find variation in length and that of this variety tibetica 
might be classed as a long S. microphylla or a short 5. pubescens. The identity of the 
specimen has been hard to determine. The fact that, apart from Batalin's specimen, 
I have seen none of S. pubescens from Kansu, while S. microphylla is indigenous 
there, seems a sufficient reason, since the specimen is of difficult determination and 
in view of the reasons given above, to attribute it to the species known to be found 
in that locality. 



SYRINGA MICROPHYLLA 155 

Under S. persica var. laciniata Weston is mentioned a specimen now in the 
herbarium of the Magyar Nemzeti Muzeum, Budapest, which was collected at 
Tsing tschou, or Tsin chow, in Kansu by Ludwig Loczy (no. 175 c) while on the 
Bela Szechenyi expedition. Kanitz and Lingelsheim determined this as S. persica. 
Through the courtesy of Dr. Filarsky the specimen was sent to the Arnold Arbore- 
tum for examination. Although the flowers grow on a leafy shoot, appearing 
therefore to belong to the group of the Villosae, yet this sometimes occurs, abnor- 
mally, on plants of the Vtdgares. This specimen was collected on August 29, 1879, 
and represents therefore a second blooming. Mr. Rehder determined it as S. 
micro phylla and his notation on the specimen reads: "Syringa microphylla Diels. 
Inflorescentia anormalis, ut saepius in plantis cultis hujus speciei per aestatem et 
autumnum occurrit." See S. persica var. laciniata. A photograph of this specimen 
is in the Arnold Arboretum herbarium. 

In the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum are two specimens of S. microphylla 
(no. 378) collected in 1 910 by William Purdom in Shensi northwest of Hancheng 
hsien. Curiously, one of these was determined by Mr. Schneider as S. pubescens, 
the other by Mr. Rehder as S. microphylla. This is an example of the difficulty 
encountered, already mentioned, when an attempt is made to distinguish these 
two species. It has also been collected on many occasions by Joseph Hers in Honan : 
no. 252, on April 23, 1919, at Teng feng, Yu tai shan, at an altitude of 800 meters, 
the local name "sunglo cha," the flowers used as a substitute for tea; no. 201, same 
date and locality, the Chinese name "yeh ting siang," "wild syringa;" no. 201 bis, 
probably from the same plant as no. 201, on June 17, 1919, at Teng feng hsien, 
Yii tai shan, where the date seems strange in view of the freshly matured fruit; 
no. 67, August 20, 1919, at Mienchih at an altitude of 800 meters; no. H-1719, 
September 20, 192 1, at Tsi yuan hsien, Tien tan shan, with Chinese name "pai 
ma shu;" no. H-1792, September 21, 1921, at Tsi yuan hsien, Tien tan shan, with 
Chinese name 'chang yeh pai;" no. 2485, April 25, 1923, at Chengchow, Chinese 
name "siu kiu ting siang." 

Hers also collected the plant (no. H-1855) in Shansi, at Hia hsien, Huang lai 
kow on October 2, 192 1, where the Chinese name is given as "huang hua hu"; K. 
Ling (herb. no. 9290) found it on July 12, 1892, in the same province, no precise local- 
ity is cited, and he notes that it is a shrub 3 ft. tall growing under Quercus at an 
altitude of 5600 ft. 

Hers also collected it (no. 2424) in eastern Kansu at Fu kiang hsien, Hin yeh 
shan, on August 22, 1922; it was growing at an altitude of 1400 meters and the 
Chinese name is given as "tze ki ting siang," "four season syringa," said to flower 
all the year round. 

In China it is found as a cultivated plant as evidenced by the J. F. Rock speci- 
mens (nos. 12,203, * 3 7698) collected respectively in June and September, 1925, 
at a lamasery at Choni, in the T'ao River basin, at 8500 ft.; the first was taken 
from a tree 15-20 ft. tall, with pink flowers lacking fragrance; the second from a 



156 THE LILAC 

shrub 6-8 ft. tail, with lavender flowers and small leaves. J. Hers found it (nos. 
H-199, 312, 2484, 2571, 2483, 2584) much cultivated in Honan: the first specimen 
at Kai feng, with Chinese name "tze ting siang"; the second at Yu tai shan, with 
Chinese name "yeh ting siang," "wild syringa," the flowers dark lilac, very sweet 
scented; the third at Chengchow, with Chinese name "siao yeh ting siang," and 
noted as "the common lilac of Honan gardens where it takes the place of 5. oblata 
which is so common farther north"; the fourth, again from Chengchow, much 
like no. 2584 in appearance, bears about the same inscription; the fifth, from 
Chengchow, "introduced from the hills," with Chinese name "ting siang"; the 
sixth, from Chengchow, is noted as a bush about 2 m. high, with "straight stems 
close together," the specimen representing a second blooming. There are in the 
same herbarium specimens (Peattie nos. 65, 66, 70, 79) from the U. S. Department 
of Agriculture's Field Station at Bell, Maryland, collected by A. Rehder in 1924 
of which no original source is mentioned, as well as specimens which he collected 
in 1922 and 1923 from other plants, (S. P. I. 38, 829). One of these, collected in 
September, shows both a flower cluster (a second blooming is characteristic of this 
species) and fruit. These were raised from F. N. Meyer's no. 2102 a, collected in 
1914 at Nantochu, Shensi. There are also numerous specimens taken from a 
plant (no. 7199 Arn. Arb.) which was raised from Purdom's seed (no. 583). 

The Syringa microphylla offered for sale by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, 
Nancy, France (Cat. no. 189, 21, 1924-1925) is evidently not S. microphylla, 
for the description mentions it as "A new species of the section Ligustrina; tall 
panicles of white flowers in June." I have seen no specimen of this plant but 
Mr. E. Lemoine, after seeing a photograph of the flowers of S. microphylla (no. 
7199 Arn. Arb.) wrote me on July 1, 1925: "D'apres celle du Syringa microphylla, 
je vois que la plante que j'avais sous ce nom est bien differente; du reste j'ai recu 
de l'Arnold Arboretum une petite plante dont les pousses ne ressemblent pas a 
celles de nos plantes." 

The plant of S. microphylla (no. 7199 Arn. Arb.) now growing in the Arnold 
Arboretum was received in December, 1913, from Messrs. James Veitch and Sons, 
who raised it from Purdom's seed (no. 583). Although now over twelve years old 
it is only about five feet tall, although its breadth is considerably greater. Near 
the ground the stout, twisted, brownish-gray branches spread horizontally, but 
the branchlets, yellow-green in color, are long, "whispy," and so slender as to droop 
under the weight of the flower-clusters when the plant is in bloom. Early in April 
the somewhat small foliage expands and it does not fall until well into October, 
or in mild seasons even later. The flower-clusters are small, rarely over three inches 
long, but, as is the case with most of the Lilacs of the group which produce their 
flower-clusters from lateral buds, they appear from many pairs of buds on the same 
branchlet and intermingle, producing what appear to be large and showy inflores- 
cences, sometimes ten inches or more long. Small leaves often appear at the base 
of the subdivisions of the inflorescence, and pairs of leafy shoots occasionally alter- 



SYRINGA MICROPHYLLA 157 

nate with pairs of flower panicles. Sometimes also one bud of a pair may produce 
flowers, the other foliage. The individual flower is pale in color tone and small, 
symmetrically formed, with pointed, cucullate corolla-lobes and slender tube and 
has a very sweet fragrance. This plant has the curious habit of blooming twice 
in one season, — some of what would normally be the next year's flower clusters 
expanding prematurely during the late summer or autumn months (generally those 
near the top of the branchlet), — and this second flowering period lasts over a con- 
siderable number of weeks. It is not so showy as the first; moreover the shrivelled 
rhachis frequently remains the following year and mars somewhat the perfection 
of the spring flower clusters. This second blooming has been noted at various 
times by Professor C. S. Sargent in the Arnold Arboretum Bulletins; it is not, how- 
ever, peculiar to the Arboretum plant. The same thing may be seen on a specimen, 
already mentioned, in the Arboretum herbarium which was collected by Mr. A. 
Rehder on September 26, 1923, from a plant (S. P. I. no. 38,829; no. 2102a F. N. 
Meyer) growing at the U. S. Department of Agriculture Field Station at Bell, 
Maryland. I have noted the peculiarity on two plants growing in a New Jersey 
garden, and John Dunbar (Florists Exch. September 22, 1923, 799) has written 
that it "produces a few blossoms in August and September." The same thing 
frequently occurs on the plant of 5. Meyeri Schneider (no. 6623 Arn. Arb.) but to 
a less noticeable extent and accounts for the flat-topped appearance of the next 
spring's inflorescences which are, as in the case of S. microphylla, made up of a 
number of clusters although they appear as one. See also S. Meyeri. 

S. microphylla is nearly related to S. velutina. In the latter species the corolla- 
tube is funnelform, and the anthers are inserted near the mouth, while in the 
former the corolla-tube is cylindric and the anthers are inserted just above the 
middle of the corolla-tube. In habit S. microphylla is more slender, and the 
branches arch under the weight of the flower-clusters while those in the sturdier 
S. velutina are held more upright. Nor does the Korean plant, so far as I have 
observed, bloom more than once in a season. S. microphylla is also exceedingly 
closely related to S. pubescens and the individual flowers of the two species look 
much alike although the corolla-tube is, as a rule, shorter in S. microphylla which 
appears to be the more pubescent plant; nor is the fragrance of the flowers the 
same. In habit the two differ considerably, S. pubescens being of sturdier, more 
upright and taller growth. In herbarium material they are frequently difficult to 
distinguish and it is possible that at some future time they may be united as forms 
of one species. 

Littleleaf Lilac has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized 
Plant Names." 



Plate LXXX 



SYRINGA PUBESCENS 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 1594) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1025. 



Plate LXXXI 





SYRINGA PUBESCENS 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 1504) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. April 30, 1926. 



Plate LXXXII 




SYRINGA PUBESCENS 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 1594) 

Two flower clusters. May 30, 1924. 



Plate LXXXIII 




SYRINGA PUBESCENS 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 1594) 

Flower clusters. May 30, 1924. 



Plate LXXXIV 







T m Inllil - Ott ^^K1 Li/ W^K 



SYRINGA PUBESCENS 
(Garden of Mr. M. Delano, Orange, N. J.) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked October, 1926. 



Plate LXXXV 







w u-> o- 

£ H M 

W 6 
o 

w 

pq 



c <u 



<u 



ft 2 = 

S5 < ^ 

i— i _ - i_ 

« — rt 

►h o sq 

< 



SYRINGA PUBESCENS 

Syringa pubescens Turczaninov in Bull. Soc. Nat. Moscou, xm. 73 (1840). — Hance 
in Jour. Botany, n. s. rv. 133 (1875). — Mollendorf in Zeitschr. Ges. Erdk. Berlin, xvi. 
136 (1881). — Bretschneider in Bull. Soc. Nat. d'Acclim. France, ser. 3, ix. 580 (1882); 
Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 351, 1057 (1898). — Franchet in Bull. Soc. Philom. 
Paris, ser. 7, rx. 121 (1885); Observations sur les Syringa du nord de la Chine, reprint, 

I, 5 (1885); in Jour. Botanique, rv. 317 (1890); in Rev. Hort. 1891, 308, 333; in Garden, 
xl. 157, 202 (1891). — Cornu in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 3, rx. 275 (1887). — Sargent 
in Garden and Forest, 1. 222, 414, fig. 67 (1888); rv. 262 (1891); in Bull. Arnold Arb. 
no. 23, May 22 (1912); no. 40, May 9 (1913); n. s. ni. 28 (1917); vni. 22 (1922). — Nagy 
in Gartenflora, xxxvn. 587 (1888). — E. Lemoine in Garden, xxxrx. 92 (1891). — Mouil- 
lefert, Traite. Arb. Arbris. n. 1001 (1892-1898). — Garden and Forest, vi. 264, fig. 39 
(1893). — L. Henry in Jardin, vm. 88, 102, 249 (1894); xrv. 247, t. (1900); xv. 280 
(1901); in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 11. 727, 728 (1901). — Martinet in Jardin, 
rx. 109, t. (opp. p. 114) (1895). — Hariot in Jardin, rx. 120 (1895). — Rehder in Moller's 
Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xrv. 207 (1899); in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vr. 3300 (1917); 
Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 755 (1927). — Nicholson, HI. Diet. Gard. Suppl. 696 
(1900). — Dauthenay in Rev. Hort. 1901, 251. — Schneider in Wien. HI. Gartenz. xxvm. 
100 (1903); Dendr. Winterstudien, 221, 266, fig. 210 a-e (1903); in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. 
rx. 80 (191 1); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 229 (191 1); HI. Handb. Laubholzk. 

II. 776, figs. 486 v-y, 487 d-f (1912); in Sargent, PI. Wilson. 1. 297 (191 2), under S. 
Potaninii; in Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913); in Gartenschonheit, 
vm. 141, fig. (p. 142) (1927). — Zabel in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 13, 65 (1904). — 
Dunbar in Gard. Mag. 1. 234 (1905); in Florists Exch. Sept. 22, 1923, 799. — Mottet, 
Arbust. Orn. 245 (1908); Arb. Arbust. Orn. 340 (1925). — Koehne in Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges. no. 19, 114 (1910). — Bean, Trees and Shrubs Brit. Isles, n. 571 (1914). — 
Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxni. 154, fig. (1916); Aristocrats of the Garden, 220 (1917); 
America's Greatest Garden, 49 (1925); in Horticulture, n. s. m. 233, fig. (1925). — Lin- 
gelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-h. 84, fig. 4 (1920), in part, excluding syno- 
nyms 5. tsinglingsana and S. Dielsiana. — McFarland in Gard. Mag. xxxrv. 43, fig. 
(1921). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 403 (1922). — 
Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa 
L.), 4, 20 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, n. (1926). 

S\yringa] Chinensis Turczaninov in Bull. Soc. Nat. Moscou, xin. 73 (1840), as a synonym. 

Slyringa] villosa /3 ovalifolia De Candolle, Prodr. vm. 283 (1844). 

Syringa villosa Decaisne in Nouv. Arch. Mus. Paris, ser. 2, n. 41 (1879). — Franchet in 
Nouv. Arch. Mus. Paris, ser. 2, vi. 84 (1883); PI. David. 1. 204 (1884). — Nicholson, 
111. Diet. Gard. m. 536 (1887). — J. D. Hooker in Bot. Mag. cxv. t. 7064 (1889). — 
Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 116, fig. 66 (1889). — Hemsley in Jour. Linn. Soc. 

159 



160 THE LILAC 

London, xxvi. 83 (Ind. Fl. Sin. ir.) (1889). — Bean in Garden liii. 276 (1898). — 
Koehne, Deutsch. Dendr. 499 (1893). — Mottet, Arbust. Orn. 246 (1908). — Not 
Vahl. 

Siao (small) ting hiang Bretschneider, Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 1057 (1898), as 
a Chinese synonym. 

S[yringa] villosa angustifolia De Candolle according to L. Henry in Jour. Soc. Hort. 
France, ser. 4, 11. 728 (1901), as a synonym. 

Syringa villosa var. pubescens Gard. Chron. ser. 3, xxxvm. 123, fig. 43 (1905). 

Syringa pubescens var. typica f. pilosa Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. ix. 80 (1910); 
111. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 776 (1911). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 20 (1926), re- 
printed from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

A shrub up to 15 ft. tall, as broad as tall; branches upright, slender, sparingly len- 
ticellate, when old fissured; branchlets glabrous or sometimes puberulous, quadrangular, 
sparingly lenticellate. Winter-buds ovoid with acuminate apex, flower bud 7 /ie in. long 
more or less, scales pale yellowish brown with darker brown markings, often loosely 
appressed, acuminate, pilose-pubescent, keeled. Leaf-scar much raised, shield-shaped, 
conspicuous, medium size; bundle- trace raised, semicircular. Leaves orbicular-ovate 
to rhombic-ovate, %-2^ in. long, l /2~i z /i in. broad, short-acuminate or acuminate to 
obtusish, base rounded or cuneate, ciliolate, dark green and glabrous above, paler, pu- 
bescent, sometimes villose, especially on veins near base beneath; petiole 4 /i2 _7 /i2 in. 
long, slender, glabrous, or puberulous. Inflorescence lateral, rarely terminal, upright, 
2^-5 in. long, 1^-2 in. broad, flowers sometimes fascicled; rhachis glabrous or puberu- 
lous; pedicel short, glabrous or puberulous; calyx glabrous or rarely puberulous, with short, 
acute or acuminate teeth; corolla-tube slender, cylindric, V2 _7 /i2 in. long; corolla- 
lobes spreading at right angles to corolla- tube, narrow, pointed, cucullate; corolla M~H 
in. in diameter, color in bud Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.); when expanded Purplish Lilac 
without, white marked with Purplish Lilac (xxxvh.) at throat within; anthers Vinaceous 
Purple (xliv.), inserted slightly above middle of corolla- tube. Capsule oblong, b j n - 
u /i2 in. long, acute or acuminate, sometimes mucronate, verrucose. (The notes on the 
color of the flowers were taken from a plant (no. 1594) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 

Habitat: China: province of Chihli. 

Nicolai Turczaninov first described Syringa pubescens in 1840 as a Syringa with 
ovate acute leaves, pubescent on the midrib beneath, ciliate on margins, with very 
short, obtuse calyx lobes, and stated that it grew on cliffs at the foot of the mountains 
of northern China. He does not mention the name of its collector, but Bretschneider 
(Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 1. c.) later writes that he believes it in all 
probability to have been P. Y. Kirilov who traveled through Mongolia in 183 1 
with the Russian botanist Alexander von Bunge, as physician to the nth Russian 
Ecclesiastical Mission, for specimens collected by Kirilov were, at the time of 
Bretschneider's writing, in the herbarium of the Botanic Garden at St. Peters- 
burg. Adrien Franchet (Bull. Soc. Philom. Paris, 1. c.) in part also based his 
description of this species upon an unnamed specimen in the Cosson herbarium 
which was collected by Bunge, "ad fines septentrionales Chinae et Mongoliae prope 
pagum Nordian." The village of Nordian is probably in Chihli. 



SYRINGA PUBESCENS 161 

In June, 1927, Mr. C. K. Schneider visited Paris and examined this specimen 
on my behalf. He wrote: "the long lobes with the reflexed tips are very significant. 
The largest leaf measures [i 5 /i6 inches]." Of the pubescence of the foliage he 
writes: "subtus praesertim ad costam nervosque (versus basin foliorum) sparsim 
(vel magis) pilis subscrispis obtecta;" and also, "otherwise the plant is almost 
entirely glabrous except [for] very [few?] hairs sometimes on the calyx and the 
pedicels." Schneider determined this as 5. Meyeri with a question. I see no 
reason to think that this specimen is the cultivated S. Meyeri rather than S. pu- 
bescens. A fragment of the specimen enclosed by Mr. Schneider shows the vena- 
tion of S. pubescens and not that characteristic of 5. Meyeri. The two species, 
as noted later, bear a striking resemblance. Schneider adds: "On the label I 
find in pencil-writing Syringa Davidi Franch. Bull. Soc. Philom. (1885) p." This 
reference is presumably to Franchet's "Observations sur les Syringa du nord de la 
Chine" which appeared in 1885 in the publications of the Societe Philomatique de 
Paris. No such name however was published in that article; it may merely mean 
the Syringa of David, referring to the David specimens recorded by Franchet in 
his monograph as identical with S. pubescens. 

To Dr. Emil Bretschneider, medical attache of the Russian Legation at Peking, 
China, is due the introduction of the plant into cultivation. He writes: "In the 
Peking mountains, there grow abundantly two beautiful representatives of the 
genus Syringa with bluish purple flowers like our common Lilac. They have fre- 
quently been confounded by botanists, but the late C. Maximowicz always con- 
sidered them as two distinct species, as does also Mr. Franchet. In their wild 
state they are easily distinguished by their outer appearance : Syringa villosa Vahl . . . 
is the larger one, sometimes growing treelike and inhabiting the higher regions of 
the mountains. Mr. O. v. Moellendorfl . . . terms it the 'large-leaved Syringa' . . . 
Syringa pubescens . . . first gathered by Bunge and Kirilov in 183 1, and described 
by Turczaninov in 1840. . . . This shrub, from 6 to 8 feet high, is found in the lower 
regions of the mountains, has smaller leaves, 1 Yi inches long, ovate, white beneath, 
pubescent on the midrib. Flowers also smaller than in S. villosa. The small 
capsules covered with warts. In Chinese Siao (small) ting hiang." In a footnote 
Bretschneider adds: "ting hiang (literally 'nail's perfume') is properly the Chinese 
name for cloves, but is also applied to Syringa." [For the resemblance of the 
Lilac flower-bud to the Clove see also 5. vulgaris where the similarity is recorded 
in various vernacular names for the Common Lilac] Bretschneider continues: 
"Of these two Chinese mountain lilacs, I have sent, from 1879 to 1882, herbarium 
specimens in flower and plenty of capsules with ripe seeds to Kew, the Arnold 
Arboretum, the Museum d'hist. nat. and the Societe d'acclim., Paris, and the 
Botan. Garden, St. Petersburg, where both these species were successfully culti- 
vated." 

There is in the collection of photographs at the Arnold Arboretum one (no. 
7286) of S. pubescens taken at Hsiao wu tai shan, Chihli. It shows the difficult 



162 THE LILAC 

conditions under which the plant sometimes grows. It was taken on August 20, 
1913, by Frank N. Meyer (no. 5925) and his notation reads: "A medium sized 
wild lilac with rather small leaves found in rocky places at altitudes of from 5000 
to 8000 feet." 

In his "Liste des Essences ligneuses observees dans le Honan septentrional" 
(31, 1922) J. Hers cites as Chinese name for 5. pubescens, "siao yeh ting siang." 

Under "New Chinese and Mongolian Plants discovered by Dr. P. Kirilov and 
described by C. A. Meyer, Ruprecht, Regel, Maximowicz," Bretschneider (Hist. 
Europ. Bot. Discov. China, p. 351) mentions: "Syringa pubescens, Turcz. . . . no. 
30. China borealis. Collector not mentioned, but most probably Dr. Kirilov 
had sent the plant. There are in the Herb. Hti. Petrop. specimens gathered by 
Kirilov, Peking. . . . Mr. Hemsley, following Decaisne, reduces this, erroneously 
to S. villosa Vahl." 

In Mollendorf's "Reisen und Topographische Aufnahmen in der nord-chinesi- 
schen Provinz Dshy-li" published in the "Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft fur Erdkunde 
zu Berlin" in 1881, S. pubescens appears in a list of plants collected by Hancock 
and Mollendorf in the Hsiao wu tai shan. These mountains are west of Peking, 
on the border of Chihli and Shansi. The collection was determined by Maxim- 
owicz. Reviews of this article, including the list of plants collected, appeared in 
Just's "Botanischer Jahresberichte " (rx. pt. 11., 416, 1881 [published in 1884]) 
and in Engler's "Botanische Jahrbucher" (rv. 467, 1883). 

L. Henry (Jardin, viii. 249, 1894) writes in some detail of the introduction of 
S. pubescens to France: "Son introduction, encore recente, est due a M. le Dr. 
Bretschneider, medecin de la legation russe a Pekin, qui, en 1880, en envoya des 
graines au Museum d'histoire naturelle de Paris, out elles furent cataloguees sous 
le nom errone de S. villosa. Cet envoi . . . fut fait en deux lots semblables. L'un 
de ces lots fut expedie par la voie maritime ordinaire, F autre par voie de terre. Les 
graines venues par mer parvinrent les premieres au Museum et furent inscrites a 
la date du 27 decembre 1880. Les autres n'arriverent qu'un mois plus tard; elles 
figurent a la date du 25 Janvier 1881. . . . M. Decaisne, alors professeur de Culture, 
partagea la plupart de ces graines, entre autres celles de Lilas, avec M. Lavallee 
qui a cette epoque, s'employait avec ardeur a enrichir son bel Arboretum de Segrez. 
. . . Semees au Museum au printemps de 1881, les graines de S. pubescens four- 
nirent un bon nombre d'exemplaires dont la croissance fut rapide. La premiere 
floraison se montra des 1885, dans la partie du Jardin dite Carre" des Couches, ou 
se faisait alors tous les semis. A Segrez, les resultats ne furent pas moins favorables. 
. . . l'annee suivante, M. Robert Lavallee presentait a la Societe d'horticulture 
(s6ance du 27 mai 1886) des fleurs de S. villosa, nom sous lequel des graines de 
S. pubescens avaient ete remises par M. Decaisne a M. Alph. Lavallee. A la meme 
seance, M. le professeur Max. Cornu, qui avait succ6d6 a M. Decaisne, appelait 
l'attention de la Societe" sur ce Lilas, en lui appliquant son vrai nom de S. pubescens, 
nom que M. Franchet avait declare^ devoir lui etre attribue. Dans la seance du 



SYRINGA PUBESCENS 163 

12 mai 1887, M. Cornu presentait a nouveau le S. pubescens, et mettait les horti- 
culteurs en garde contre la confusion qui paraissait vouloir s'etablir a propos de ce 
Lilas; il rejetait, pour cette espece, le nom de S. villosa . . . c'est au Jardin des 
Plantes de Paris que sa floraison fut signalee pour la premiere fois, et c'est de la 
qu'il se repandit. Des le 1" avril 1889, le Museum proposait cette espece en echange 
a tous les jardins botaniques, a l'6tat de jeunes plantes en pots, et, au mois de 
decembre suivant, elle etait mise en distribution aux etablissements publics 
d'instruction (Ecoles d'agriculture et d'horticulture, Ecoles normales, jardins de 
Societes d'horticulture, etc.). Depuis cette epoque, le S. pubescens a ete largement 
distribu6 chaque annee par le Museum, a tous les jardins scientifiques, soit sous 
forme de graines, soit sous forme de jeunes plantes." Elsewhere L. Henry (Jardin 
xrv. 247, 1900) notes that Decaisne entered the seed when received as Lilas a 
fruits verruqueux. Despite the wide distribution made in France by the Museum 
the plant is referred to as rare by Dauthenay, writing in 1901. The firm of V. 
Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, offered 5. pubescens for sale in 1890 (Cat. no. 115, 
xx. 1890). 

5. pubescens is listed for sale by Dieck (Haupt-Verzeich. Zoschen, Nachtr. 1. 
27, 1887), owner of the Zoschen nursery near Merseburg, Germany. He notes it 
as "noch sehr selten in den Garten." 

Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker writes that Bretschneider's seed was received at 
Kew Gardens in 1880 and the plants raised flowered for the first time in 1888 

Seed from the same collector was received at the Arnold Arboretum in December, 
1882, and according to Professor C. S. Sargent (Garden and Forest, 1. c.) the plants 
raised first flowered in 1886. The plant (no. 1594 Am. Arb.) now in the Arnold 
Arboretum was grown from this seed. 

After describing 5. pubescens, Turczaninov writes: "S. chinensis L. pro qua 
hanc plantam prius habui plantae nostrae non absimilis praecipue foliis, etiamsi 
paulo longioribus et in formam ovato-lanceolatam vergentibus, distat glabritie 
eorum perfecta et lobis calycinis acutis satque longis, tubo nempe subtriplo tantum 
brevioribus." Turczaninov had evidently written to De Candolle in regard to this 
S. chinensis for De Candolle cites as a synonym of his S. villosa /3 ovalijolia, 
"S. chinensis Turcz[aninov] : in litt." 

De Candolle calls this species 5. villosa /3 ovalijolia, a name which L. Henry 
misquotes, — since he mentions the precise citation from De Candolle, — in his 
synonym S. villosa angustifolia. 

Decaisne bases his Syringa villosa on specimens collected by the Pere Armand 
David in "Mongolia, prov. Gehol, mont. Ta-Ladre-chan" [ = no. 2038, 1797] and 
"Ta-Tchio-chan" [ = no. 2239]. Both of these localities are in the province of 
Chihli, China. Franchet cites the same specimens for his S. villosa [ = S. pubescens] 
described in the "Plantae Davidianae" in 1883; and later, in his "Observations 
sur les Syringa du nord de la Chine" published in 1885 he refers to S. pubescens 
the David specimens, nos. 2088, 1797 and 2239 (a fruiting specimen), — the flower- 



164 THE LILAC 

ing specimen no. 2239 being identified by him as the true S. villosa Vahl. Henry F. 
Hance (Jour. Botany, 1. c.) writes: "Syringa pubescens, Turcz. Flowers almost 
sessile. I have fruiting specimens from Pere David, gathered from the mountains 
around Jehol, where he reports it of rare occurrence. Regarded by De Candolle as 
a variety of 5. villosa, Vahl, which I have not seen." This is evidently one of the 
specimens upon which Decaisne based his S. villosa [ = S. pubescens]. 

Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker notes that Dr. [Thomas Lowndes] Bullock of the 
British Embassy at Peking collected S. villosa [ = S. pubescens], and Hemsley 
(Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxvi. 83, 1889) under the same name also cites this 
Bullock specimen, gathered "high up Mount Conolly." Dr. E. Bretschneider 
(Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, p. 736) writes: "In 1886 B[ullock] sent a small 
collection of plants, 134 species, gathered among the Peking mountains, Po hua 
shan, Mt. Conolly, to the Botan. Gardens, St. Petersb. The same plants seem to 
have been received at Kew." According to Bretschneider' s map of China the 
Po hua shan is a short distance northwest of Peking, Chihli. Hooker was evidently 
quite clear as to the characters of 5. pubescens although he was confused as to the 
plant's name and origin, attributing its discovery to d'lncarville; his descrip- 
tion, accompanying an excellent colored plate, is good: "The specific name of 
villosa is unfortunately chosen for this plant ; what villousness it possesses is confined 
to the lower parts of the costa of the leaf beneath, and to the bases of the main 
nerves; such as it is, it is deciduous and often totally absent, even on the young 
leaves. This is the case with the specimen here figured, in which I find mere traces 
of hairs on some leaves and none on others." 

The S. pubescens var. tibetica of Batalin I refer to S. microphylla Diels. 

Franchet gives S. pubescens as one of the plants collected by Emile Bodinier 
at Sy-lin-chan. See also 5. villosa. 

An unsigned article in "The Gardeners' Chronicle" (ser. 3, xxxviii. 123, fig. 43, 
1905) gives both S. villosa and 5. pubescens as synonyms of its 5. villosa var. 
pubescens. The illustration, "drawn by Mr. Worthington Smith from a specimen 
exhibited in the spring of the present year [1905] at the Royal Horticultural Society, 
by Messrs. Paul and Son, of Cheshunt" is clearly S. pubescens. 

Lingelsheim mentions 5. tsinglingsana [sic] Schneider as a synonym of S. pubescens. 
He had seen in the Biondi-Giraldi Herbarium in the Botanical Museum, Florence, 
Italy, the specimen (no. 7193) collected on July 10, 1900, by the Rev. Giuseppe 
Giraldi in the mountains of Tsing ling san, in northern Shensi which, according 
to information very kindly supplied me on December 1, 1926, by Dr. R. Pampanini, 
was determined by Schneider as S. tsinglingsana, but later identified by Lingelsheim 
as S. pubescens. The name was evidently derived from the locality where the 
plant was found. This was one of the specimens (the other being Giraldi no. 741) 
upon which Schneider (Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 82, p. 88, 1905) founded his 
species 5. Dielsiana [ = S. microphylla]. In the text he mentions 5. tsinlingsana 
but without description. There is no record, either according to notes upon the 



SYRINGA PUBESCENS 165 

Giraldi specimens sent me by Dr. Pampanini or according to labels on the speci- 
ment, that Schneider recorded there his determination and name S. Dielsiana. 
On the label he spells the name Syringa tsinglingsana. From the photograph 
and from fragments of this specimen sent me by Dr. Pampanini I believe 
that this specimen represents 5. microphylla and not S. pubescens. See 5. micro- 
phylla. 

Of his new form, S. pubescens var. typica f. pilosa Schneider (Fedde, Rep. Sp. 
Nov. ix. 8o, 191 1) merely writes: "inflorescentis pedicellisque laxe breviter pubes- 
centibus"; he mentions no specimen; later (111. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 776, 1911) 
he adds: "mit locker kurzhaarigen Blst. und Bl. Stielen (N. China, Tschili, Po hua 
shan)." This is merely a pilose form of S. pubescens and I have included it in the 
typical form. 

In the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum are spontaneous specimens collected 
by Joseph Hers in 192 1 in the province of Chihli, China, from the Po hua shan 
(nos. H-1400, H-1414, H-1436, H-1662), from the Hsiao wu tai shan (no. H-1498), 
from Tsing shui tsien (no. H-1625), and from Tsing shui tsien (no. H-1636). The 
Chinese name is noted (nos. H-1414, H-1662, H-1636) as "ting siang," (nos. H-1436, 
H-1625) as "siao yeh ting siang," and (no. H-1498) as "siao yeh pai ting siang." 
In 1922 the same collector found it (no. H-2104) at Huai lai hsien, Yang kia 
ping, and here the name is noted as "tsing kang tze." F. N. Meyer gathered it 
(nos. 124, 1237) in the Hsiao wu tai shan, Chihli, in 1913, in rocky places in the 
mountains at an elevation of 4000-10,000 ft. Father Chanet also found it (nos. 
12, 60) in Chihli in 191 8 and 191 9 but no precise locality is cited. 

The following specimens from cultivated plants are in the same herbarium: 
A. Rehder (2 unnumbered sheets) from the Botanic Garden, Gottingen, where it 
was cultivated as 5. villosa, dated 1889, 1894; Purpus (unnumbered) from the 
Botanic Gardens, Darmstadt, dated May 23, 1894; G. Nicholson (no. 4004) 
from the Arboretum, Royal Gardens, Kew, where again it was grown as S. 
villosa; H. Zabel (nos. 24, 26, 40) from the garden of the Forest Academy, Muen- 
den, Hanover, where again it was grown as S. villosa and where, respectively, 
the plants were received from the Botanic Garden, Gottingen (from Regel [seed], 
Peking), from Breslau (Peking [seed]) and from the Botanic Garden, Paris; 
C. K. Schneider (no. 86) collected it at Eisgrub in Czechoslovakia in 1904. 
There are also specimens from the Field Station of the U. S. Dept. of Agriculture 
at Chico, California, from the collection at Highland Park, Rochester, New York, 
as well as numerous ones from Southboro, from Holm Lea, Brookline and from the 
Arnold Arboretum, all in Massachusetts. 

Lingelsheim cites spontaneous specimens of 5. pubescens from Kansu (Filchner 
no. 9), and from Shantung, Kiautschou, Loschan (Krug no. in). These I have 
not seen. 

The plant of S. pubescens growing in the Arnold Arboretum has been said not 
to produce seed. The same species, growing at Southboro, Massachusetts, is known 



166 THE LILAC 

to have fruited but there is no record that the seed was ever planted. John Dunbar 
of Rochester, New York, recorded that this species produces few seeds, sometimes 
none at all. Mr. T. A. Havemeyer of Glen Head, New York, tells me that it fruits 
readily on Long Island, and I have seen five young plants in one garden in New 
Jersey produce, each, a good quantity of capsules in the autumn of 1926. In the 
United States S. pubescens blooms early in the season and the flower buds are apt 
to be injured by late frosts. This is also recorded of the plants growing in the Jardin 
des Plantes in Paris, where the irregularity in the production of fertile seed is 
attributed (Jardin, vm. 249, 1894) to this cause, for in favorable seasons it is there 
said to fruit abundantly. As already noted the species was distributed in the form 
of seeds by Bretschneider and the Jardin des Plantes also made distribution of the 
same material. 

At Kew Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker reports the plant as hardy, but W. J. Bean 
writes (Trees and Shrubs Brit. Isles, 1. c.) : "It is only a second-rate lilac in this 
country, owing to the frequent injury of the young growths and panicles by late 
frost. In the United States, where the summer heat is greater, and the seasons 
better defined, it is very beautiful." 

Dr. W. T. Macoun (Report of the Dominion Horticulturist for the year 1922, 
p. 38) mentions S. pubescens among the best ornamental shrubs hardy at Ottawa, 
Canada. 

L. Henry (Jardin, vni. 249, 1894) notes the hardiness of S. pubescens in France: 
"Cette espece est d'une rusticite complete. Elle se comporte a souhait dans 
l'atmosphere enfumee et poussiereuse et dans les terrains tres sees du Museum, 
terrains si defavorables a, tant de plantes a, cause des platres [dried mortar] qui les 
impregnent." Elsewhere (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 11. 729, 1901) he states 
"Le S. pubescens, dont les inflorescences sont visibles dans les boutons des le mois 
de fevrier, fleurit a peu pres a la meme epoque que le S. oblata, et, comme ce dernier, 
il est quelquesfois touche par les froids; toutefois, il en souffre en general beaucoup 
moins, et il est assez rare que la floraison en soit completement perdue." He notes 
its tendency to flower a second time, "Cette espece a une tendance marquee a 
remonter, et souvent de nouvelles fleurs, en petit nombre il est vrai, apparaissent 
fin mai." 

Henry states that it succeeds better if grafted upon S. persica or S. dubia [ = S. 
chinensis] stock rather than upon that of the Common Lilac. It succeeds well 
also, he notes, when grafted on Privet. 

The value of hybridizing S. pubescens with other Lilacs has been suggested by 
E. Lemoine and J. H. McFarland. The latter writes: "This fine Chinese native 
ought to be a find for the hybridiser, introducing as it would several desirable 
qualities, — in color, fragrance, blooming habit, and distinct foliage. But first 
some nurserymen need to make up and produce stock of a plant far more desirable 
than the average shrub 'novelty.' " Dunbar writes that it is in demand among 
connoisseurs but scarce in nurseries. 



SYRINGA PUBESCENS 167 

S. villosa and S. pubescens, although at one time confused, belong to different 
groups of Lilacs, — the former to the Villosae group where the flower clusters, 
on leafy shoots, appear from terminal buds, and the latter to the Vulgares group, 
where the clusters, not on leafy shoots, appear normally from lateral buds. The 
anthers of 5. villosa are yellow while those of S. pubescens are bluish. 

This species has been called by various common names as follows : Lilas duvete 
by Cornu (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 3, rx. 275, 1887); Lilas pubescent by 
Mouillefert (Traite Arb. Arbris. 11. 1001, 1892-1898); Lilas a fruits verruqueux by 
Decaisne according to L. Henry (Jardin, xrv. 247, 1900) ; Zottiger Flieder by Dippel 
(Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 116, 1889) and others; Pubescent Lilac by Nash (Jour. N. Y. 
Bot. Gard. xx. 234, 1919). Hairy Lilac has been adopted as approved common 
name by "Standardized Plant Names." 

S. pubescens (no. 1594 Arn. Arb.), now forty-five years old, has attained a height 
of twelve feet in the Arnold Arboretum and with its numerous slender branches 
forms, from ground to top, a well-filled handsome shrub. Its foliage unfolds early 
in the spring, and the flowers are produced from the middle to the end of May, 
or in early June, — at much the same time as those of the Chinese species 5. 
Meyeri and the European S. vulgaris and its forms. It is a dependable and profuse 
bloomer. The delicate, pale, pinkish flowers, with long and slender corolla-tube, 
are not showy nor are the flower clusters large, but they are produced from one or 
more pairs of buds on the same branchlet and appear as one large inflorescence. 
It is a shrub for the discriminating plant lover, although I have frequently seen 
persons, unmindful of the inconspicuous beauty of its flowers, halted by its pungent 
fragrance, — distinct from that of any other Lilac. 

S. pubescens is nearly related to 5. Meyeri; the leaves of the two species differ 
in their venation, and the flowers in their color and fragrance, but the anthers of 
both are much the same bluish color, and are inserted in the same position in a long 
and slender corolla- tube; as noted under S., Meyeri it is possible that that species, 
which is not known as a wild plant, may merely be a selected form of S. pubescens. 
It is also exceedingly closely related to S. microphylla and it is frequently difficult 
to distinguish specimens of these two Lilacs. While not a determining character, 
the habit of the two plants in cultivation appears to be entirely different. It is 
possible that future study may lead to the conclusion that they represent forms of 
the same species. See S. microphylla. 

The attempt has been made by Miss Isabella Preston, producer of the S. 
Prestoniae hybrids, to cross S. vulgaris ($) with S. pubescens (6). In June, 
1927, I examined the seedlings raised and could find no evidence of S. pubescens 
influence. 

Mr. F. L. Skinner of Dropmore, Manitoba, Canada, wrote me on November 
18, 1925: "In 1923 I crossed S. pubescens (secured from the Central Experimental 
Farm, Ottawa) with S. vulgaris and S. velutina. Seeds were secured from both 
crosses but the resulting seedlings were weak and only two survived (S. pubescens 



168 THE LILAC 

X vulgaris)." I have never seen this cross. The attempt to cross 5. pubescens and 
5. velutina was evidently unsuccessful. 

L. Henry (Jardin, vin. 249, 1894) writes of S. pubescens: "L'introduction 
r6cente de cette espece n'a pas encore permis l'obtention de varietes bien distinctes. 
Toutefois, les semis de graines provenant directement de la Chine et ceux des 
premieres fructifications qui se sont produites au Museum indiquent une tendance 
tres sensible a, la variation. Le coloris habituel est le lilas rose; mais il existe des 
maintenant des formes blanc carne et d'autres lilas bleuatre. La grandeur des 
fleurs est assez peu constante : certains exemplaires les ont extremement petites et 
mignonnes, et d'autres beaucoup plus grandes, tout en restant toujours fines, greles 
et longuement tubuleuses. Enfin l'inflorescence, formee de grappes generalement 
reunies en des sortes de thyrses courts, compacts, contractus et plus ou moins 
developpes suivant les exemplaires de semis, s'est modiriee dans quelques-unes 
de ceux-ci, au point de devenir tres allongee, dans le genre de certains S. persica 
et 5. dubia [=S. chinensis}." H. Martinet (Jardin, rx. no, t. (opp. p. 114), 1895) 
writes of these varieties, giving an excellent reproduction of a photograph which 
shows the forms, all numbered: "Les quatres formes reproduites par notre planche 
sont les plus typiques de celles obtenues, jusqu'a ce jour, dans les semis faits au 
Museum. No. 1. — Inflorescences peu developpees, courtes et serrees; fleurs a 
tubes tres fins, lilas violace. No. 2. — Inflorescences moyennes, assez etoffees, lilas 
rose. No. 3. — Inflorescences allongees, assez serrees, lilas rougeatre. No. 4. — In- 
florescences allongees, ramifiees, legeres et particulierement elegantes; coloris lilas 
grisatre, devenant plus pale vers la fin de la floraison. Forme tres speciale et tres 
interessante." These color and form variations have not been noted elsewhere 
and it seems doubtful if any attempt was ever made to propagate or preserve them. 



Plate LXXXVI 





SYRINGA MEYERI 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 6623) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate LXXXVII 







SYRINGA MEYERI 

i Arnold Arboretum no. 6623) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. April 30, 1026. 



Plate LXXXYIII 




SYRINGA MEYERI 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 6623) 

Flowering branch, composed of eight flower clusters. June 5, 1924. 



Plate LXXXIX 








PO 




!~0 


<N 




O 


M 


t—t 

Pi 


VO 




w 


o 


>> 








< 


0) 
M 


. 




o 

i- 




Pi 


< 


O 


P 


■ O 




c/) 


"o 


* — 




c 


■*-> 




>- 

< 


C 



Plate XC 




\ 



SYRINGA MEYERI 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 6623) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked October, 1926. 



Plate XCI 




ro 





o 


to 




o 


<N 


l-H 




On 


« 


6 


H 


M 





^ 




£ 


,0 


S 


=3 
4-J 


s 




<D 


<U 


<: 


i- 


> 


55 


o 


o 


•— i 


<; 




* 






>h 


2 


^ 


Cfl 


o 


Ih 




rj 


cd 




M 


25 




< 





SYRINGA MEYERI 

Syringa Meyeri Schneider in Sargent, PL Wilson, i. 301 (1912); in. 433 (1917); 
111. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 1062, fig. 628 c (191 2); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 29, 
162 (1920); in Gartenschbnheit, vm. 142, fig. (p. 141) (1927). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold 
Arb. no. 40, May 9 (1913); n. s. 11. 15 (1916); hi. 15 (1918); vm. 23 (1922). — Render 
in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. VI. 3302 (191 7); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 755 (1927). — 
Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 85 (1920). — Silva Tarouca and 
Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 404 (1922). — Dunbar in Florists Exch. September 
22, 1923, 799. — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PL Names, 495 (1923). — 
Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 4, 20 (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, n. (1926). 

A compact shrub up to 5 ft. tall; branches upright, sturdy, gray-brown, slightly 
fissured, lenticellate ; branchlets frequently tinged Dark Livid Brown (xxxix.), some- 
times slightly quadrangular, glabrous or puberulous, lenticellate. Winter-buds globose 
or ovoid with obtuse or acute apex, flower bud 5 /i6 in. long more or less, scales reddish 
or yellowish brown, often loosely appressed, acuminate, glabrous except for ciliolate 
margins, prominently keeled and forming a markedly four-sided bud. Leaf -scar much 
raised, semicircular, conspicuous, small; bundle-trace raised, slightly curved. Leaves 
elliptic-ovate or elliptic-obovate, sometimes ovate, K _I M in- long, 3^ _I H in. broad, 
acute, acuminate, obtusish or rounded, base cuneate or broad-cuneate, ciliolate, dark 
green, glabrous, occasionally minutely puberulous especially along veins above, paler, 
glabrous, occasionally villous on veins near base beneath, with two pairs of veins from 
base paralleling the margins; petiole slender, \i~Yi in. long, glabrous or puberulous, fre- 
quently tinged Dark Livid Brown (xxxix.) . Inflorescence lateral, rarely terminal, upright, 
with flowers frequently fascicled, 1-4 in. long, 1-1^ in. broad; rhachis glabrous or puberu- 
lous, frequently tinged Dark Livid Brown (xxxrx.); pedicel V12 in. long, glabrous or 
puberulous, frequently tinged Dark Livid Brown (xxxix.) ; calyx glabrous or puberulous 
with short acute teeth, frequently tinged Dark Livid Brown (xxxrx.) ; corolla-tube very 
slender, cylindric, Yi in. long; corolla-lobes spreading at right angles to corolla- tube, 
cucullate, with raised margins; corolla M in. in diameter, color in bud Dahlia Carmine 
(xxvi.) to Light Perilla Purple to Purplish Lilac (xxxvh.); when expanded Argyle 
Purple or Purplish Lilac with margins of Light Pinkish Lilac without, Argyle Purple to 
Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvn.) within; anthers Ramier Blue (xlih.), }/g in. long, inserted 
slightly above the middle of corolla-tube. Capsule oblong, slender, 3^~M in. long, 
acuminate, verrucose. (The notes on the color of the flowers were taken from a plant 
(no. 6623) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 

Known only as a cultivated plant and first found in a garden at Fengtai near 
Peking, Chihli, China. 

169 



170 THE LILAC 

Frank N. Meyer, collecting for the Bureau of Plant Industry of the U. S. 
Department of Agriculture, sent from Chihli, China, two sets of Syringa cuttings 
which appeared in the Department's Bulletin (no. 142, 57, 1909) as S. P. I. 
nos. 23,032 and 23,033. The first of these came from Fengtai near Peking and the 
collector notes: "(no. 694, Mar. 31, 1908). A small-leaved lilac, bearing many 
panicles of purple flowers, grafted upon a small-leaved privet. Much used in 
forcing; quite rare and expensive; not hardy. Chinese name 'Shau ting hsien.' " 
The second came from Tientsin and the notation reads: "(no. 695, Apr. 3, 1908). 
A small-leaved lilac, the same species as the preceding number (S. P. I. no. 23032), 
but apparently of slightly different colors. There are two white-flowering ones 
among them; otherwise the same remarks apply to it as to no. 694 (S. P. I. no. 
23032). Keep them protected from heavy frosts. Has a future for the western 
people as a very graceful, spring-flowering shrub of dwarf y habits." 

From Meyer's cuttings of no. 23,032, distributed by the Department of Agri- 
culture in Washington in December, 1908, a plant (no. 6623 Am. Arb.) was raised 
at the Arnold Arboretum. It was upon a flowering specimen from this plant 
(now in the herbarium) that Schneider in 191 2 founded his description. Translated, 
it reads: A shrub apparently of the habit of S. pubescens, the young branches 
quadrangular, the older ones minutely pubescent; the leaves ovate-elliptic or 
slightly obovate, acute at both ends or at the apex obtusish, above green, very 
glabrous, beneath hardly paler, toward the base on the nerves pubescent, ciliate, 
2-5 cm. long and 1.8-3 cm - broad, with 2 pairs of lateral veins running toward 
the apex; petiole 5-1 1 mm. long, pilose like the branchlets. Inflorescence similar 
to that of 5. pubescens, toward the base furnished with leaves incompletely de- 
veloped, branches with minute pubescence; flowers violet, with long tube; pedicel 
hardly 1 mm. long, puberulous; calyx violet, about 1.5 mm. long, glabrous, short- 
toothed; tube of corolla 15-16 mm. long, hardly dilated toward the apex; lobes of 
corolla to 4 mm. long, acute, spreading; anthers inserted in tube about 6 mm. below 
the mouth of corolla, probably violet. Fruit unknown. Schneider further writes : 
"This species is very closely allied to S. pubescens Turczaninow, but differs in the 
longer tube of the corolla, the minutely but distinctly puberulous branches and in 
the different venation of the leaves. I am in doubt whether the anthers are violet 
as in S. pubescens or rose as in S. Potaninii." While the venation, as Schneider 
notes, differs in the two species, yet I find the length of the corolla-tube frequently 
the same, and the branchlets of both sometimes glabrous, sometimes puberulous. 
In 191 7 Schneider writes: "This species is not yet known in a wild state. ... It is 
apparently a slow-growing species, forming a densely branched small bush." 

The number S. P. I. 23,033 (Meyer no. 695) was evidently applied — according 
to Meyer's notes already quoted — to more than one plant. In the herbarium of 
the Arnold Arboretum are flowering specimens from the Plant Introduction Field 
Station (U. S. Department of Agriculture) at Chico, California, which were col- 
lected in 1916 and 1918, from plants raised from this number. One of these (field 



SYRINGA M.EYERI 171 

no. 5733) notes that the "flowers are white," with a "good lilac odor." In this 
specimen the venation of the leaves is not the same as that of the typical S. 
Meyeri but more nearly resembles in this and other particulars, S. pubescens to 
which species I refer it. Another specimen, also field no. 5733, but referred to as 
"Bush no. 2" is noted as having flowers "Mauvette, Ridgway" and of "very good 
lilac odor." Apart from the record of the plant's fragrance, which in S. Meyeri 
is slight and not especially pleasing, this specimen appears to be identical with 
typical S. Meyeri. 

In the same herbarium is a flowering specimen (no. 85 Hers) collected on April 
20, 1920, by Joseph Hers at Chengchow in northern Honan, China. The note 
states that the Chinese name is "nan-ting-siang (South Syringa)," that the plant 
was "cultivated. A slow grower, never higher than 4 or 5 feet; very scented, dark 
lilac. Rarely found on its own roots, more often grafted on Ligustrum. Its name 
seems to imply a foreign or southern origin." In his "Liste des Essences ligneuses 
observers dans le Honan septentrional" (30, 1922) J. Hers again cites as Chinese 
name for S. Meyeri "nan ting siang." 

S. Meyeri (no. 6623 Arn. Arb.) now nearly twenty years old in the Arnold 

Arboretum has only reached a height of about five feet, and justifies the opinion 

of its collector and others that it is slow growing. Contrary to Meyer's statement 

it has so far proved entirely hardy. Its smooth branches are upright and sturdy 

and form a symmetrical, neat bush with a somewhat flat top. It is well foliaged 

from mid-April to mid-October, and the flowers appear in late May or early June, 

rather earlier than do those of most of the Lilac species from China, and at about 

the same time as those of S. pubescens. The plant has a curious and abnormal 

habit, also observed, though to a greater degree, in S. microphylla, of blooming 

twice in one season ; the spring flowering is the showier, but in September, October, 

or thereabouts, flower-clusters, which should normally open the following spring, 

unfold, generally from one or more pairs of lateral buds near the top of the branchlet; 

when the remaining clusters on the branchlet expand the following spring the 

absence of these topmost flower panicles gives a somewhat truncated look to what 

appears to be one inflorescence composed, however, not of one cluster, but of 

numerous small ones, which as a rule are not over four inches long and very often 

with fascicled flowers. These small clusters appear frequently from as many as 

five pairs of lateral buds on the same branchlet, and, intermingled, seem to produce 

one effective panicle five or more inches long and four or more broad. These 

combined clusters are held stiffly erect and lack grace and neither their dark color, 

nor their slight fragrance is particularly pleasing. A curious character of the 

individual blossom is the tiny, pocket-like corolla-lobe, formed by the cucullate 

apex and raised margins. The corolla-tube is exceptionally long and slender. 

The venation of the leaves, paralleling the margins, appears to be the character 

most clearly distinguishing 5. Meyeri from other nearly related Lilacs. The leaves 

are retained until late autumn. 



172 THE LILAC 

As noted by Schneider, this species is closely allied to S. pubescens; the dark, 
bluish anthers are present in both and are inserted in the same position in the long 
and slender corolla-tube, or slightly above the middle. The flowers of the two 
species differ, however, both in color and in fragrance, and, as already noted, the 
leaves in their venation. It is possible that further study may lead to the con- 
clusion that S. Meyeri, which is not yet known as a wild plant, is merely a selected 
form of S. pubescens. 

Meyer Lilac has been adopted as approved common name by " Standardized 
Plant Names." 



SYRINGA WARDII 
Syringa Wardii W. W. Smith in Notes Bot. Gard. Edinburgh, ix. 132 (1916). 

A shrub about 0-15 ft. tall; branchlets slender, when young covered with pale gray 
pubescence. Leaves rotundate, z /%-i in. long, %-% m - broad, obtusish or rarely 
short-acuminate, base rounded or slightly cuneate, glabrous above, slightly paler, glabrous 
beneath, with conspicuous midrib and primary veins; petiole 1 ls- 5 lie in. long, slightly 
pubescent near juncture with the blade. Inflorescence lateral, 2^-3^ in. long, 1^-2% 
in. broad; rhachis pale-gray-pubescent; pedicel Y% in. long or less, pale-gray-pubescent; 
calyx cup-shaped, short, with pronounced, acuminate teeth, glabrous or minutely pubes- 
cent; corolla-tube V4 -7 /i6 in. long, cylindric; corolla-lobes rounded or slightly pointed 
at apex, sometimes cucullate, with a pronounced hook; corolla }4r% hi. in diameter; 
anthers yellow, inserted slightly above the middle of corolla-tube. Fruit unknown. 

Habitat: China: province of Yunnan. 

W. W. Smith first described Syringa Wardii from a specimen (no. 312) collected 
in 1913 at Tung chu ling, in the province of Yunnan, by F. Kingdon Ward who 
records that it was a "small tree or shrub of 10-15 ft.; arid region, 10,000 ft." 
The date of collection is not given. Smith states: "The collector notes that the 
same plant is found in the Mekong Valley and near Atuntsu at 12,000 ft." 

His description, translated, reads: A small tree or shrub 3-5 m. tall; the 
young branches dense grayish pubescent; the older branches glabrescent, gray; 
the leaves of flowering branches 1-2 cm. long, 1-2 cm. broad, suborbicular or rather 
broadly ovate, rounded or obtuse at the apex, base more or less rounded, above 
deep green, glabrous, beneath paler, glabrous or subglabrous with slender veins 
distinctly reticulate; petiole 2-3 mm. long, minutely pubescent or glabrescent; 
the inflorescence about 10 cm. long, about 7 cm. broad, erect, rather loose, densely 
white pubescent, minutely glandular; pedicels 1-3 mm. long, pubescent, minute 
shining glandular; flowers pale on dried specimens ; calyx about 2 mm. long, glabrous 
or subglabrous, sparingly minutely glandular, with truncate mouth and minute 
teeth, or almost lacking teeth; tube of corolla 9-13 mm. long, dilated above the 
middle; corolla-lobes ovate, obtuse, about 4 mm. long; anthers inserted slightly 
above the middle of corolla-tube with apex removed by 2-3 mm. from mouth of 
corolla; fruit lacking. 

Professor Smith states that this species is nearly related to Syringa oblata Lindley 
and to Syringa affinis Henry [ = S. oblata var. affinis] but differs from these in its 
smaller leaves, generally rounded at the apex. 

173 



174 THE LILAC 

Through the courtesy of the Regius Keeper of the Royal Botanic Garden, 
Edinburgh, the type specimen of flowers was sent for examination to the Arnold 
Arboretum. 

S. Wardii is most closely related to S. microphylla. As far as is possible to 
judge from herbarium material the anthers of the former are yellow while those of 
5. microphylla are bluish. In both species they are inserted in the same position 
in the corolla-tube. The fruit of S. Wardii is unknown to me. 

As noted under S. pinetorum, S. Wardii and certain other Lilacs classified in 
this group need further study. 



Plate XCII 




SYRINGA OBLATA 
(Garden of Mr. H. H. Richardson, Brookline, Mass.) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate XCIII 












SYRINGA OBLATA 
(Garden of Mr. H. H. Richardson, Brookline, Mass.) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. May 3, 1926. 



Plate XCIV 




SYRINGA OBLATA 
(Garden of Mr. H. H. Richardson, Brookline, Mass.) 

Flower clusters. May 7, 1925. 



Plate XCV 




SYRINGA OBLATA var. GIRALDII 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 20,200) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate XCVI 




SYRINGA OBLATA var. GIRALDII 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 20,200) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. April 30, 1926. 



Plate XCVII 




SYRINGA OBLATA var. GIRALDII 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 20,200) 

Flower cluster. May 13, 1925. 



Plate XCVIII 




SYRINGA OBLATA var. GIRALDII 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 20,200) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked October, 1926. 



Plate XCIX 




p 
< 

o 



o 
o 

o 

6 



o 

l-H 



< 

m 

o < 

O o 

a £ 

CO 



3 « 



ON 



g 

> 
o 






Plate C 





SYRINGA OBLATA var. DILATATA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 10,202) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate CI 




SYRINGA OBLATA var. DILATATA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 10,202) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. April 27, 1926. 



Plate CII 




SYRINGA OBLATA var. DILATATA 

(Garden of Mr. Walter Hunnewell, Wellesley, Mass.) 

Flower clusters. May n, 1925. 



Plate CI1I 




SYRINGA OBLATA vax. DILATATA 
(Garden of Mr. Walter Hunnewell, Wellesley, Mass. 

Flower clusters. May n, 1925. 



Plate CIV 




Cj 






> 
H 

<: 

PQ 
O 

<! 
O 



e 
c 



<N 






o 



Cfl o 

c 

0) 

o 



Plate CV 




SERINGA OBLATA var. DILATATA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 10,202) 

Fruit enlarged. 



Plate CVI 




< 

< 
< 



o 

<N 



n 2 



< 

pq 
o 

< 
o 

« 

CO 



o 

a 
+j 

>-l 

o 






s 

a> 
> 
o 



1-4 

PQ 



SYRINGA OBLATA 

Syringa oblata Lindley in Gard. Chron. 1859, 868. — De Talou in Hort. Francais, 
1859, 133. — Regel in Gartenflora, ix. 106 (i860). — Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. 
Preuss. in. 34 (i860). — [Carriere] in Fl. Serres, xin. 126 (year 1858; issued i860); in 
Rev. Hort. 1874, 280; 1875, 240. — Jager, Ziergeholze, 529 (1865). — [K. Koch] in 
Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. xn. 44 (1869); Dendr. n. pt. 1. 266 (1872). — 
Hartwig and Rumpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 564 (1875). — De Vos in Nederl. Fl. 
Pom. 201 (1876). — Lavallee, Arb. Segrez. 169 (1877). — Bon Jard. 1878, 809. — De- 
caisne in Nouv. Arch. Mus. Paris, ser. 2, 11. 40 (1879). — Lauche, Deutsch. Dendr. 170 
(1880). — Franchet in Nouv. Arch. Mus. Paris, ser. 2, vi. 85 (1883); PI. David. 1. 205 
(1884); in Bull. Soc. Philom. Paris, ser. 7, ix. 121 (1885); Observations sur les Syringa 
du nord de la Chine, reprint, 3, 5 (1885). — Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. in. 536 (1887). — 
Sargent in Garden and Forest, 1. 221, fig. 39 (1888) ; in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 23, May 22 
(1912); no. 40, May 9 (1913); n. s. ni. 22 (1917). — Nagy in Gartenflora, xxxvn. 587 
(1888). — Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 113, fig. 65 (1889). — Hemsley in Jour. Linn. 
Soc. London, xxvi. 83 (Ind. Fl. Sin. n.) (1889). — J. G. J[ack] in Garden and Forest, 
in. 322 (1890). — P. C. in Garden and Forest, iv. 343 (1891). — E. Lemoine in Garden, 
xxxrx. 91 (1891); in Jardin, vi. 152 (1892). — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 379 (1892). — 
Mouillefert, Traite Arb. Arbris. 11. 998 (1892-1898). — Koehne, Deutsch. Dendr. 500 
(1893). — L. Henry in Jardin, vui. 88, 102, 161 (1894); xv. 280 (1901); in Jour. Soc. 
Hort. France, ser. 4, n. 727, 730 (1901). — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 653 (1896). — 
Bretschneider, Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 480, 1058 (1898). — Bean in Garden, 
Lni. 276 (1898); Trees and Shrubs Brit. Isles, 11. 569 (1914). — Dunbar in Amer. Garden- 
ing, n. s. xx. 183, fig. 44 (1899); in Gard. Mag. 1. 234 (1905). — Rehder in Moller's 
Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xrv. 206 (1899); in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3301 (191 7); 
Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 755 (1927). — Diels in Bot. Jahrb. xxix. 531 (1900). — 
Foussat in Jardin, xv. 280 (1901). — J. D. Hooker in Bot. Mag. exxvn. t. 7806 (1901). — 
Lobner in Gartenwelt, v. 548, fig. (1901). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laub- 
holz-Ben. 414 (1903). — Schneider in Wien. 111. Gartenz. xxviii. 100 (1903); Dendr. 
Winterstudien, 220, 265, figs. 210 f-m (1903); in Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 92, p. 86 
(1905), in part, excluding Giraldi specimens no. 738, 1643, 4395, 4397, 4399; in Mitt. 
Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 226 (1911); HI. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 772, figs. 485 d-f, 
486 a-e (1911); in Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1903). — Komarov in 
Act. Hort. Petrop. xxv. 252 (Fl. Mansh. in.) (1907). — Mottet, Arbust. Orn. 245 (1908); 
Arb. Arbust. Orn. 340 (1925). — Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxni. 153, 154 (1916); Aristocrats 
of the Garden, 215, 219, 220 (1917). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233, fig. (1917). — 
Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 88 (1920). — Silva Tarouca and 
Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 404 (1922). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in 
Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923). — Stares, Cerines {Syringa L.), 4, 5, fig. 1 (1926), 

175 



176 THE LILAC 

reprinted from Darzkopibas, n. (1926). — G. Hegi, 111. Fl. Mittel-Eur. v. pt. 111. 191 1, 
1912 (1927). 

Syringa chinensis Bunge in Mem. Sav. Etr. Acad. Sci. St. Petersb. 11. 116 (i835)(Enum. 

PL Chin. Bor. 42, 1833). —Not Willdenow. 
Syringa japonica Hort. according to [K. Koch] in Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. 

Preuss. xii. 44 (1869), as a synonym. 
Syringa vulgaris Hemsley in Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxvi. 83 (Ind. Fl. Sin. n.) 

(1889). — Not Linnaeus. 
Syringa vulgaris var. oblata Franchet in Rev. Hort. 1891, 330; in Garden, XL. 173 (1891). 
Syringa oblata var. a typica Lingelsheim in Engler, Pfianzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 88 (1920), 

in part, excluding Giraldi specimens nos. 737, 738, 1643, 4395> 4396, 4397, 4398, 

4399 and Faurie specimen no. 516. — G. Hegi, 111. Fl. Mittel-Eur. v. pt. rn. 1911 

(1927). 

A compact shrub or small tree up to 12 ft. tall; branches upright, sparingly lenticel- 
late; branchlets stout, smooth, sparingly lenticellate. Winter-buds globose with acute apex, 
flower bud B /i6 in. long more or less, scales dark reddish brown with paler, more yellow- 
brown margins, acute or rounded, glabrous or rarely minutely puberulous, keeled, form- 
ing a four-sided bud. Leaf-scar much raised, shield-shaped, conspicuous, large; bundle- 
trace only slightly curved. Leaves orbicular-ovate or reniform, frequently broader than 
long, %~4 in. long, 1-4^ in. broad, abruptly acuminate, base cordate or subcordate, 
rarely truncate, glabrous, only rarely pubescent, when young tinged on margins 
Burnt Umber (xxviii.); petiole }4r% in. l° n g, glabrous, rarely pubescent, tinged at 
first Burnt Umber (xxviii.). Inflorescence from lateral buds, upright, 2-5 in. long, 
iHr~3 in. broad; rhachis, pedicel and calyx covered with short, glandular-tipped pubes- 
cence; pedicel short; calyx with acuminate teeth; corolla-tube cylindric, 3^3-^ in. long; 
corolla-lobes spreading at right angles to corolla-tube, rounded at apex, slightly cucullate; 
corolla Yi in. in diameter; color in bud Laelia Pink (xxxvin.) to Purplish Lilac (xxxvii.) ; 
when expanded Pale Lilac (xxxvii.) tinged with Laelia Pink (xxxvin.) ; anthers Deep 
Colonial Buff (xxx.), inserted slightly above the middle of corolla- tube. Capsule obo- 
void-oblong, abruptly contracted near apex, Yr^A m - l° n g, smooth, acuminate. (The 
notes on the color of the flowers were taken from a plant growing at Mr. H. H. Richard- 
son's, Brookline, Massachusetts.) 

Known only as a cultivated plant and first found in a garden in northern China. 

Alexander von Bunge, the Russian botanist and traveler, in his enumeration 
of the plants which he had observed in northern China in the year 1831, mentions 
a Lilac, common in gardens, which he identifies with S. chinensis Willdenow. His 
reference reads: "241. Syringa chinensis W. Frequens in hortis; vix a S. vulgar i 
distincta. Floret Aprili." Joseph Decaisne, although he does not state that he 
has seen Bunge's material, considers this to be 5. oblata, as does Franchet in 1883 
(Plantae Davidianae), although in his "Observations sur les Syringa du nord de 
la Chine" published two years later, he states that he has seen in Mr. Cosson's 
herbarium two specimens (no. 341) collected by Bunge and believes one to be 
5. chinensis or the Lilas Varin of gardeners. He bases this opinion upon its lanceolate 



SYRINGA OBLATA 177 

leaves, narrowly attenuate at the base; the other specimen, with larger, though not 
fully developed leaves, he believes may be 5. oblata. I have not seen Bunge's 
material. On my behalf Mr. C. K. Schneider examined this specimen in June, 1927, 
and writes: "this is undoubtedly S. oblata" The specimen with lanceolate leaves 
according to Schneider appears to be 5. chinensis. He notes that it "may be a 
cultivated plant from Europe." See 5. chinensis. Although there are two speci- 
mens, one S. oblata and the other S. chinensis, it is apparent that Bunge is applying 
the name 5. chinensis to the S. oblata specimen for he notes its similarity to S. 
vulgaris and its frequent cultivation in Peking gardens. 5. chinensis seems to be 
in cultivation in China at the present time for there is in the herbarium of the 
Arnold Arboretum a specimen (no. H-196) collected on April 24, 192 1, by Joseph 
Hers, in a garden at Chengchow in northern Honan, which appears to be identical 
with this hybrid. Hers notes the Chinese name as "ting siang" and states that it 
is "one of the Syringas cultivated in this province." 

Robert Fortune, who, according to Bretschneider, visited China four times, 
brought back Syringa oblata to England at the end of his third trip (185 3- 185 6). 
John Lindley quotes him as follows: "The Chinese informed me it came from the 
North and was common in the gardens of Pekin. Full grown specimens are about 
the size of our English Lilac but more tree-like in the general outline; the leaves 
also are very striking, being large, rather fleshy, and oblately cordate. The species 
blooms profusely, and its fine bunches of purple flowers are very ornamental. There 
is a white variety equally interesting [see 5. oblata var. affinis] found in the same 
country which I have succeeded in getting home alive. . . . Both these varieties 
will be found perfectly hardy in England, and will no doubt prove attractive objects 
in our parks and gardens. I may mention that the Chinese nurserymen propagate 
them by grafting on the Privet (Ligustrum lucidum)." 

Lindley's description reads: "It differs from the common Lilac in its leaves 
being as broad or even broader than they are long, and in the flowers, which are 
not more than half the size, forming a thin loose panicle nearly destitute of the down 
of the common Lilac. The cup of the calyx is also more acutely four- toothed." 

The naturalist Pere Armand David, who was attached to the Mission of the 
Lazarists in Peking, also collected this species from a cultivated plant in Peking 
and it was upon his specimen (no. 2378) that Decaisne and Franchet based their 
descriptions. This specimen, dated 1865, is in the herbarium of the Museum of 
Natural History, Paris, and David's note reads: "Lilas cultive dans le jardin. 
Odeur forte, moins agreable que celle du Lilas ord[inaire] de France." 

William B. Hemsley in 1889 notes in addition to the David specimen of S. 
oblata, one in the herbarium at Kew Gardens, which was collected at Peiling in the 
province of Shingking, or Shengking, by Webster. He writes: "Webster's specimen 
differs from the cultivated ones in the branches of the inflorescence and the calyx 
being pulverulent. Assuming this to be wild, it is the first known." J. D. Hooker 
in 1 901 writes: "more recently it has been collected in a wild state in Western 



178 THE LILAC 

Kansu by Potanin, and at Moukden in Shingking by the Rev. J. Webster." Ac- 
cording to Bretschneider (Hist. Europ. Bot. Discov. China, 765, 1898) the Rev. 
James Webster was a missionary of the United Presbyterian Church of Scotland 
Mission, and was stationed at Moukden in Manchuria. His collections were sent 
to Kew and recorded in Hemsley's "Index Florae Sinensis." This Webster speci- 
men, of flowers and foliage, was forwarded for examination through the courtesy 
of Dr. A. W. Hill, Director of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. On the same sheet 
is the Potanin specimen referred to by Hooker. While the former specimen is 
clearly S. oblata, the latter was determined by Mr. Rehder as the wild plant S. 
oblata var. Giraldii. 

Of the S. vulgaris specimen collected by "Ross (?)" at Shingking, Chienshan, 
Hemsley notes: "The Chinese specimen is recorded as this species without doubt; 
but we regard it as insufficient for satisfactory determination." This is presumably 
S. oblata. 

[K. Koch] (Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. xn. 44, 1869) writes: 
"Vielleicht ist sie aber mit einer Art identisch, welche wir unter dem Namen 
Syringa japonica in einigen Garten gefunden haben, obwohl sich diese durch 
langere Blatter unterscheidet. Die ebenfalls kleineren Bluthen besitzen eine 
violettblaue Farbe und bilden kleinere und schlaffere Rispen, welche zum Theil 
aus dem Winkel der oberen Blatter entspringen." I have cited this S. japonica 
as a possible synonym of S. oblata. 

For his S. oblata var. a typica Lingelsheim cites eight Giraldi specimens, frag- 
ments and photographs of all of which were sent me by Dr. Pampanini. They are: 
nos. 737, 738, 1643, 4395, 439 6 > 4397, 439 8 > 4399- Lingelsheim's variety is dis- 
tinguished by its very glabrous, larger leaves up to 10 cm. long and broad. He 
does not distinguish the variety Giraldii. Schneider (Bot. Jahrb., 1. c.) cites as 
examples of S. oblata the Giraldi nos. 738, 1643, 4395> 4397> 4399 given by Lingels- 
heim and also a Giraldi no. 4308 which he states is a fruiting specimen collected in 
September at Tui kio shan. This I have been unable to find among a complete 
list of Giraldi specimens which were sent me by Dr. Pampanini who states: "the 
Rev. Giraldi sent all his collections here to our Botanical Museum [Florence, Italy]. 
Only to the Botanical Museum of Berlin we have given duplicates." Schneider 
cites (Bot. Jahrb., 1. c.) the Giraldi no. 737 as an example of S. affinis L. Henry 
[ = 5. oblata var. affinis]. The leaves of none of the specimens noted by Lingelsheim 
show the cordate or subcordate base which we find in those of S. oblata, nor are 
the flower clusters as compact as those ordinarily associated with that species. 
The specimens more nearly resemble the wild variety Giraldii to which I 
refer them. The other specimens cited by Lingelsheim (Fortune, without number, 
and Sargent, without number) are undoubtedly S. oblata. The Faber (no. 1552), the 
von Trotha (no number), the Wawra (no. 1101) and the Krug (from Shantung) 
specimens I have not seen. The Faurie plant (no. 516) from Korea I refer to S. 
oblata var. dilatala. 



SYRINGA OBLATA 179 

Lindley writes of S. oblata: "We refrain from giving a specific character to this 
plant on account of the uncertainty under which we labour as to its distinctness 
as a species from S. vulgaris." Professor C. S. Sargent in 1888 writes in "Garden 
and Forest": "S. oblata differs but slightly in botanical characters from some 
forms of S. vulgaris, a geographical variety of which, it should, perhaps, be con- 
sidered, although from a garden point of view, quite distinct." J. D. Hooker also 
notes its close relationship to the Common Lilac, as does Franchet in 1891, — calling 
it S. vulgaris var. oblata. W. J. Bean in 1898 writes that it is more nearly related to 
S. villosa Vahl, but later, in 1914, he approaches it to S. vulgaris. The fact that 
S. oblata produces its flower clusters, which are non-leafy at the base, from lateral 
buds, while S. villosa normally produces them upon leafy shoots from terminal 
buds, places these two species in different groups of Lilacs. 

Lindley in 1859 writes: "Mr. Glendinning's nursery contains the only specimens 
of the purple variety of this species alive in Europe." This nursery was at Chis- 
wick. Whether the specimens distributed at first on the continent, in England, 
and in America, came from these specimens, I have been unable to ascertain, for 
no mention of its early distribution is found in the literature of this species. Hooker 
states that "A plant of it was obtained by the Royal Gardens, Kew, in 1899, from 
Mr. Lemoine's Nurseries of Nancy"; he records that "It flowered in the Temperate 
House in April of this year [1901]." Possibly many of the plants of this Lilac had 
their origin in seed sent by Dr. Bretschneider to St. Petersburg. He writes: 
"Syringa oblata Lindl[ey] . . . principally characterised by its large broad leaves 
and treelike growth, is much cultivated at Peking; lilac or white flowers; not 
observed in a wild state in the Peking mountains. But it seems to grow wild in 
Manchuria. Ind[ex] Fljprae] Sin[ensis] n. 83. — The plant was raised from my 
seeds in Bot. Garden, St. Petersburg, where it flowered in April, 1888." Henry 
(Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 11. 731, 1901) refers to it as "Espece assez rare et 
confinee dans les collections." 

The "Index Kewensis" (in. 1026, 1895) cites "Syringa oblata, Lindley ex 
Carriere in Fl. des Serres, xni. (1858) 126." This is incorrect since Carriere 
does not cite the author. Even had this volume been issued in 1858 Carriere's 
name could not be considered a valid publication because without a descrip- 
tion. Under the year 1858, printed on the title page, it is stated "Paru en 
i860." 

The Arnold Arboretum first received S. oblata, as grafts, from Holm Lea, 
Brookline, Massachusetts, in March, 1882. The original source of these plants 
is not known. Although at one time there were numerous specimens of 5. oblata 
in the neighborhood of Boston, at the present day these, as well as the old plants 
in the Arnold Arboretum, have disappeared. Mr. H. H. Richardson of Brookline, 
who, so far as I know, possessed the only large plant of this Lilac in the neighbor- 
hood, lost a large part of it in the ice storm of November, 1921. Professor Sargent 
(Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 23, May 12, 191 2) notes: "In gardens this plant becomes a 



180 THE LILAC 

tall, broad shrub, but the brittleness of the branches, which are often broken down 
by snow or ice, reduces its value." 

Mr. Victor Lemoine tells (Garden and Forest, n. 326, 1889; Hamburg. Gart. 
Blumenz. xlv. 459, 1889; Gard. Chron. ser. 3, vi. 152, 1889) of using 5. oblata 
to pollinize Azurea plena, the early double-flowered form of the Common Lilac. 
Lemoine's hybrid, 5. hyacinthiflora, with double flowers, was the product of 
this cross. Many references to this early hybridization work with the Lilac which 
was carried on with great difficulty by Mr. Lemoine have appeared in garden 
periodicals. 

S. oblata is distinguished, among other particulars, by the fact that it produces 
its flowers earlier than does any other Lilac species with the exception of 5. pin- 
natifolia Hemsley, flowering in mid-May in the neighborhood of Boston. In France 
the flowers are said to open in mid-April. Professor Sargent (Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. 
ni. 23, 191 7) writes: "This is one of the earliest Lilacs to bloom here, but unfortu- 
nately the flower-buds are often injured or destroyed by late frosts. For this reason 
. . . this plant cannot be recommended for general cultivation in this part of the 
country." W. J. Bean notes of the plant in England, "My experience of it is, 
that it is the most unsatisfactory of all lilacs except S. amurensis. It is excited 
into growth by mild weather in early spring, only to have its young leaves and 
flowers destroyed by later frost. Probably in higher localities it may succeed 
better, for the shrub itself is perfectly hardy, and in climates with a more settled 
winter than ours flowers abundantly." Herbarium specimens taken from the 
plants at one time growing in the Arnold Arboretum and at Holm Lea, show that 
the two lateral flower buds at the top of the branchlet are often entirely destroyed, 
the bloom appearing only from the second or third pairs of flower-buds. Carriere 
(Rev. Hort. 1874, 280) suggested its value as a forcing, rather than as a garden 
plant, for the reason that the same injury occurred frequently in Paris. J. D. 
Hooker in 1901 had never seen the fruit of S. oblata and it is probable that it is 
not plentifully produced in certain localities because of this injury to the flower 
buds. 

P. C. (Garden and Forest, iv. 343, r89r) writes: "There is a Chinese Lilac, 
however, which is not troubled by mildew. This is the plant found in gardens 
under the name S. oblata. . . ." J. G. J[ack] (Garden and Forest, 111. 322, r89o) 
however states: "It has been claimed that these [S. oblata] are not attacked by 
the mildew which often seriously injures some other kinds of Lilacs, but, in some 
localities at least, the foliage of this species is by no means exempt from the disease." 
Professor Sargent in the same magazine (11. 492, 1889) tells of certain plants of 
S. oblata being affected while others were uninjured. 

In the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum are the following specimens taken 
from cultivated plants in China: J. Hers (no. 3047) from Huashan, Shensi, October 
31, 1924; C. S. Sargent (2 sheets, unnumbered) from the gardens of the Korean 
Legation and of the Imperial Palace, Peking, September, 1903; N. H. Cowdry 



SYRINGA OBLATA 181 

(no. 1327) from the Temple grounds, Hsih hsia, Chihli; also specimens from 
plants cultivated in Europe: H. Zabel (2 sheets) from the Botanic Garden of the 
Forest Academy, Muenden, Hanover, dated 1870 and 1872; Bornmuller, from 
Zoschen, dated 1896; A. Rehder (no. 2142) from the Botanic Garden, Gottingen; 
C. K. Schneider, from [the Simon-Louis nurseries] Plantieres, 1922, and from 
Eisgrub in Czechoslovakia, 1904; also specimens collected in this country from plants 
at one time growing in the Arnold Arboretum and at Holm Lea, Brookline, Massa- 
chusetts. 

In the collection of the Arnold Arboretum are two photographs (no. 7735) 
of S. oblata taken by F. N. Meyer on April 23, 191 5, in the grounds of the German 
Legation at Peking, China. A note states that this shrub is "very resistant to 
drought and alkali." Meyer in his "Chinese Plant Names" (19, 1911) under 
plant no. 219, cites for S. oblata (?) the common name of "Pai Ting Hsiang, " and, 
under the plant no. 220, which he calls 5. oblata without a question, "Tzu Ting 
Hsiang." Pai Ting Hsiang is one of the Chinese names for the variety affinis. 

In his "Liste des Essences ligneuses observees dans le Honan septentrional" 
(31, 1922) J. Hers cites as Chinese name for S. oblata "tze ting siang." 

The plant of S. oblata growing on Mr. Richardson's place produces somewhat 
globular, compact flower clusters, whose purplish flowers have little fragrance. The 
leaves are distinguished by their form, which is broader than long, with an acute 
apex and cordate base, by their short pedicels and by their color which is bronzed 
both when they unfold and in the autumn; the foliage falls considerably earlier 
than that of the Common Lilac. As has been noted 5. oblata is most nearly related 
to S. vulgaris. It would be interesting to raise this Lilac, known only as a culti- 
vated plant, from seed, and see what reversion, if any, is made to its wild varieties 
5. oblata var. Giraldii or S. oblata var. dilatata. It has been propagated, so far as 
I have been able to learn, exclusively from cuttings and by grafting, seed being 
rarely produced. 

S. oblata was offered for sale in the catalogues of such nurserymen as: in Belgium, 
Van Houtte (no. 117, 12, 1867); in France, Dauvesse (no. 36, 46, 1872), A. Leroy 
(1890, 24); in England, Anthony Waterer (1872-1873, 36); in Germany, Dieck 
(1885, 77), Spath (no. 69, 114, 1887-1888); in the United States, Parsons (1890, 
94). The plant was probably offered earlier by most of these firms, as well as by 
others. 

It has frequently been called, by K. Koch, Lauche, Dippel, and others, the 
Rundblatteriger Flieder; Hartwig and Rumpler vary- this to Flieder mit breit- 
rundlichen Blattern; Baudriller calls it the Lilas de Chine; Mouillefert the L[ilas] 
a feuilles elargies; L. Henry, Mottet and others mention it as the Lilas de Fortune. 
Bretschneider in his text refers to it as North China Lilac. Nash (Jour. N. Y. Bot. 
Gard. xx. 234, 191 9) gives it the common name of Lindley's Lilac. Broadleaf 
Lilac has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant 
Names." 



182 THE LILAC 

A spontaneous variety from northern China is : 

Syringa oblata var. Giraldii (Sprenger) Rehder in Jour. Arnold Arb. vn. 34 (1926) ; 
rx. no (1928); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 755 (1927). 

Syringa oblata Diels in Bot. Jahrb. xxrx. 531 (1901), in part, as to Giraldi specimen no. 
1643. — Schneider in Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 82, p. 86 (1905), in part, as to 
Giraldi specimens no. 738, 1643, 4395, 4397, 4399- — Not Lindley. 

Syringa villosa Giraldi Sprenger, "3rd List of Plants," 2 (1903), name only. 

Syringa Giraldi Lemoine, Cat. no. 155, vni. (1903). — Sprenger in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. 
Ges. no. 16, 68 (1907). — Mottet, Arbust. Orn. 246 (1908); Arb. Arbust. Orn. 338 
(1925). — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1909, 335, figs. 135, 136, 137. — Goeze in Mitt. 
Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 172 (1916). 

Syringa villosa Sprenger according to Lemoine, Cat. no. 155, vni. (1903), as a synonym. 

Syringa affinis Schneider in Bot. Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 82, p. 87 (1905), in part, as 
to Giraldi specimen no. 737. 

Syringa affinis var. Giraldi Schneider in Fedde, Rep. Sp. Nov. ix. 80 (1910); 111. Handb. 
Laubholzk. 11. 774 (1911); 11. 1062 (1912); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 
228 (1911); in Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 360 (1913). — Sargent in 
Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 23, May 22 (1912); no. 40, May 9 (1913); no. 54, May 14 
(1914). — Wilson, Gard. Mag. xxin. 154 (1916); Aristocrats of the Garden, 219 
(1917). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3301 (1917). — Silva Tarouca 
and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 404 (1922). — Olmsted, Coville and 
Kelsey in Stand. PL Names, 485 (1923). — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 6 (1926), 
reprinted from Darzkopibas, 11. (1926). 

S[yringa] oblata var. a typica Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 88 (1920), 
in part, as to Giraldi specimens nos. 737, 738, 1643, 4395, 439°, 4397> 439 8 > 4399- 

S\yringa] affinis Geraldiana [sic] Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. n. s. vni. 23 (1922). 

See Plates xcv., xcvi., xcvri., xcvth., xcix. 

A shrub or small tree of more open, taller habit than S. oblata. The leaves in general 
more gradually acuminate, truncate or very broad-cuneate at the base rather than 
cordate or subcordate, minutely puberulous or sometimes pubescent beneath, and cilio- 
late when young, glabrous at maturity; the flower-clusters larger and more open than 
those of 5. oblata. In habit it closely resembles the variety affinis but differs in its 
more open flower-clusters, frequently leafy, and in the color of its flowers which are 
in bud Vinaceous-Purple to Eupatorium Purple (xxxvni.); when expanded Argyle 
Purple without, Lobelia Violet marked with white at throat and with Argyle Purple 
(xxxvu.) near margins of corolla-lobes within. The winter-buds ovoid or globose with 
acuminate or acute apex, the flower bud % in. long more or less, the scales purplish 
with reddish brown margins, lustrous, the three lower pairs acute, the fourth pair acumi- 
nate, glabrous, prominently keeled and forming a markedly four-sided bud. The leaf- 
scar slightly raised, shallow shield-shaped, inconspicuous, small; the bundle-trace only 
slightly curved. (The notes on the color of the flowers and on the winter-buds were 
taken from the plant (no. 20,200) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 

Habitat: China: provinces of Shensi; Shansi; Kansu; Hupeh (?). 

In the "3rd List of Plants" issued in 1903 by the nurseryman C. Sprenger of 



SYRINGA OBLATA 183 

Naples, Italy, appears without description a Syringa villosa Giraldi from North 
China. This is the plant here classified as 5. oblata var. Giraldii. Sprenger's 
plant was undoubtedly raised from seed gathered by the Italian missionary, the 
Rev. Giuseppe Giraldi, who brought from Shensi many botanical specimens of this 
wild variety of S. oblata. These are now in the Biondi- Giraldi Herbarium, Botanical 
Museum, Florence, Italy. Giraldi's seed collections bore no numbers, so it has 
been impossible to identify the Sprenger plant with any particular specimen. 

Although considered by Sprenger to be a variety of S. villosa the two plants 
are not closely related, — S. villosa producing its flower clusters from terminal buds 
on leafy shoots, while those of S. oblata and its varieties appear from lateral buds 
on non-leafy shoots. Sprenger in 1907 states that the flowers of this plant, which 
he then calls S. Giraldi, are borne in terminal panicles and because of this state- 
ment Lingelsheim (Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 88, 1920) tells us, in a note 
under S. oblata, that he does not consider Sprenger's plant to be an Oleacea. This 
does not seem sufficient reason to exclude the plant for the rest of Sprenger's de- 
scription holds good, nor is such an error unusual. It may have been due to 
superficial observation or he may have called the two opposite buds at the end of 
the branchlet terminal. Possibly his description was based upon an abnormal 
specimen, for exceptions occur on most of the Lilac species, — flower clusters which 
should normally come from lateral buds appearing occasionally from terminal ones 
and vice versa. In my possession is a flowering branch taken from a plant of the 
variety Giraldii growing in the Arnold Arboretum, where, although the panicles 
appear from lateral buds, one of the clusters grows at the top of just such a long 
leafy shoot as is produced on S. villosa and on other Lilacs of the Villosae group. 

The first description of this variety was taken from a cultivated plant and 
appeared in the catalogue issued in 1003 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, 
France. It reads: "Syringa Giraldi (Syringa villosa Sprenger). Cette espece 
nouvelle, qui a 6t€ introduite du Nord de la Chine par le Pere Giraldi, a les tiges 
cylindriques, brunes, couvertes d'un tomentum blanchatre; les feuilles moyennes, 
cordiformes ou triangulaires, souvent plus larges que longues, sont couvertes sur 
les deux faces et sur le petiole, d'un fin duvet serre qui les rend douces au toucher 
et tout a fait veloutees. Cet arbuste n'a pas encore fleuri en Europe." It is prob- 
able that many of the plants of this variety now in cultivation were distributed 
from this source. 

The Potanin specimen collected on May 5, 1885, in western Kansu and received 
at Kew from the Botanic Garden, St. Petersburg, was referred by Hooker (Bot. 
Mag. cxxvn. t. 7806, 1901) to S. oblata and by Schneider to S. affinis Henry. 
Through the courtesy of Dr. A. W. Hill this was forwarded to the Arnold Arbore- 
tum for examination where it was determined by Mr. Rehder as the wild plant 
S. oblata var. Giraldii. The year 1885 may, therefore, have been the date when 
this Lilac was first collected, although its discovery has generally been attributed 
to Giraldi who found it first in 1891 as indicated in the following paragraph. 



184 THE LILAC 

Through the kindness of Dr. Pampanini a complete list of the Giraldi specimens 
in the Biondi-Giraldi Herbarium in the Botanical Museum, Florence, Italy, was 
sent me with their notations. Schneider determined as S. oblata the following 
specimens: nos. 738, 1643, 4395, 4397, 4399, while Lingelsheim classified these, as 
well as the additional nos. 737, 4396, 4398, as his 5. oblata var. a typica. Dr. 
Pampanini also very kindly sent me fragments and photographs of all these speci- 
mens. All, I believe, because of their truncate or very broad cuneate leaves and 
their more open inflorescence, should be identified with S. oblata var. Giraldii 
rather than with S. oblata. All were collected in Shensi and on the following dates : 
no. 737 (March 25, 1891); no. 4398 (September 15, 1893); no. 738 (July, 1895); 
no. 1643 (July 27, September 10, 1896) ; no. 4396 (summer, 1896) ; no. 4397 (Septem- 
ber 25, 1897); no. 4395 (summer, 1898); no. 4399 (May, 1899). As noted on the 
Giraldi specimens the first, no. 737, was collected in 189 1. It is possible that 
seed was sent to Europe before this date. In the Arnold Arboretum is a specimen 
(no. 43) from the H. Zabel Herbarium, which was taken in 1910 from a plant in 
cultivation at Gotha, Germany; Zabel's note states that this was received, whether 
as seed or living material is not stated, from the French nursery of Barbier, in 1895. 
Rehder (Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 1. c.) gives the date of introduction as 
"about 1895." This date Mr. Rehder tells me, he took from an entry in H. Zabel's 
manuscript catalogue of the Botanic Garden of the Forest Academy, Muenden, 
Hanover, purchased by the Arnold Arboretum with Zabel's herbarium. The 
entry records, in a list of Syringa, that Giraldii was received in October, 1895, 
from the French nursery of Barbier. I have not had access to any Barbier catalogue 
of earlier date than that of 1 896-1 897 but in the one of that year and in those of 
succeeding years down to 1900-1901, I have found no reference to S. Giraldii. 

In addition to the Giraldi collections from Shensi there is in the Arnold Arbo- 
retum herbarium a specimen (no. 340) collected in that province at Yenan fu by 
William Purdom in 1910. 

From the province of Shansi there are the following specimens: J. Hers (no. 
2060) from Sheng shih ling, found at an altitude of 1500-2500 m., the Chinese 
name noted as "mu chang tze," (no. 2694) from Shengyi, at an altitude of 1500 m., 
September 18, 1923; F. N. Meyer (no. 405) from Tsin tze, May 5, 1907, (no. 1878) 
from near Tchao yii, "in loess hills" at 4000 ft., (no. 403) from mountains near 
Tsin tze, May, 1907. 

From the province of Kansu there are the following: J. Hers (no. 2399) from 
Tsing shui hsien, Ta liu shan, at "1500 m.?," the Chinese name noted as "hung 
pao shu," (no. 2413) from Tsing chow, Kuan tze chen, at 1600 m., the Chinese name 
"lung pai;" R. C. Ching (no. 51) from Ho Ian shan, altitude of 1375-2400 m., col- 
lected on a rocky slope, and the bush noted as 18 ft. tall with pink flowers. Joseph 
F. Rock on his recent expedition (1924-1927) to northwestern China and north- 
eastern Tibet found it on numerous occasions in southwestern Kansu in the Lower 
Tebbu country: (no. 15,063) on dry shale slopes at Mayaku, altitude 8000 ft.; 



SYRINGA OBLATA 185 

(no. 14,687) on the slopes of Peshwekiang; (no. 15,036) in dry gorges of Chu- 
lungapu below Wantsang, altitude 6000-6500 ft.; (no. 15,058) on dry shale 
slopes of Mayaku, below Nyipa, altitude 8000 ft.; (no. 14,685) in dry open scrub 
in Wantsang Valley, also in dry gorges of Peshwekiang, altitude 6500 ft. The shrub 
is noted as varying, in different localities, from 6-10 ft. to 15 ft. in height. 

In the same herbarium is a specimen collected by the Rev. Hugh [Scallan] in 
1899 at Kusan, no province being mentioned. This place has not been found on any 
map but it is probably located in southern Shensi or northern Hupeh, and if 
in the latter it forms the only record known to me of the plant's habitat in that 
province. 

In the Arnold Arboretum herbarium are also numerous specimens from cul- 
tivated plants and among them the following: C. Y. Chiao (no. 61 10) collected on 
April 7, 1926 at Nanking, Kiangsu; J. F. Rock (no. 12,158) from the T'ao River 
basin, at Choni in southwestern Kansu, growing at an altitude of 8500 ft., collected 
in June, 1925 ; the plant was found at a lamasery and is noted as 15 ft. tall, spreading, 
the flowers rich lavender; there are numerous specimens collected in 1908 and 19 10 
from a plant (no. 5478 Arn. Arb.) which at one time was growing in the Arboretum 
collection and was received from Lemoine in 1906. 

Mottet suggests that 5. Giraldi may be a variety of 5. pubescens, but the fact 
that the anthers of the latter are bluish rather than yellow as in 5. oblata and its 
varieties, among other characters, separates the two species. 

Bellair writes in 1909 that he has cultivated this Lilac, received from Lemoine, 
for five years at Versailles, where its flowers, "blanc lilace," appearing about April 
15, last till early May. The flower clusters he says are more numerous than those 
of S. oblata and are not so much affected by the spring frosts. He makes an inter- 
esting observation in regard to what he terms the partial sterility of this plant. For 
several years he attributed the fact that four or five fruit capsules only were pro- 
duced on any one panicle to the injury done the flowers by frost; but when the 
same thing occurred when the season was favorable he observed more closely and 
noted that these capsules appeared at the top of the panicles, or from those flowers 
which expanded last, and he was led to the conclusion that the flowers were not 
self-pollinized, — those last to open being probably crossed by some other species. 
He therefore suggests the value of this variety for hybridizing in order that early 
bloom and other forms and colors be obtained. This is just what was being 
done by Mr. Emile Lemoine, who, two years later, introduced the first of his new 
race of Giraldii hybrids, here referred to S. hyacinthiflora. It is as one parent of 
this valuable race, which increases the length of the Lilac season and adds much to 
its beauty, that the variety Giraldii will chiefly be remembered. 

S. oblata var. Giraldii was first received at the Arnold Arboretum from the firm 
of V. Lemoine et fils, in 1906. The plant (no. 20,200 Arn. Arb.) now growing in the 
collection was received from the Department of Parks, Rochester, New York, in 
191 5. Its leaves, as they unfold about the middle of April, and its young shoots 



186 THE LILAC 

and rhachis are covered with a short, glandular- tipped pubescence which disappears 
at maturity. They are tinged with a bronze-like color, Dark Livid Brown (xxxrx.). 
The foliage is frequently retained, still green, at the end of October. It is a tall, 
slender plant with upright branches, marked with small lenticels. The early 
flowers are only slightly fragrant, and are produced in long, open clusters, and good- 
sized leaves are frequently present at the base of their subdivisions. The cucullate 
corolla-lobes have a tendency to curl backward as the flower begins to fade. The 
corolla when expanded is almost % of an inch in diameter. The anthers are visible 
in the throat. 

Purple Early Lilac has been adopted as approved common name by "Standard- 
ized Plant Names." This variety is not S. Giraldiana Schneider. 

A spontaneous variety from Korea is: 

Syringa oblata var. dilatata (Nakai) Rehder in Jour. Arnold Arb. vn. 34 (1926); 
Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 755 (1927). 

Syringa amurensis Nakai, Fl. Kor. 11. 90 (191 1). — Not Ruprecht. 

Syringa oblata Nakai, Fl. Kor. 11. 517 (191 1). — Not Lindley. 

Syringa dilatata Nakai in Tokyo Bot. Mag. xxxn. 128 (1918); Fl. Sylv. Kor. x. 48, t. 
xvni. (1921). — Wilson in Jour. Arnold Arb. 1. 41 (1919). — Sargent in Bull. Ar- 
nold Arb. n. s. vni. 23 (1920). — A. 0[sborn] in Garden, lxxxvii. 302 (1923), as 
S. dilitata. — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PL Names, 484 (1923). 

Syringa oblata var. a typica Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 88 (1920), 
in part, as to Faurie specimen no. 516. 

See Plates c, ci., en., cm., civ., cv., cvi. 

This variety differs considerably from the type in general appearance. The habit of 
the plant is more graceful, with many slender branchlets tinged when young Bay 
(11.). Its leaves are glabrous, ovate, long-acuminate, and as a rule truncate at the base; 
they are borne on very slender petioles, frequently an inch long, and when young are 
tinged Bay (11.). The flowers are handsomer, with a longer and more slender corolla- 
tube, about % in. in length, and narrower corolla-lobes. The inflorescence is more 
open and is frequently leafy, and -like the foliage, the rhachis, pedicel and calyx are 
tinged Bay (n.). It more nearly resembles the variety Giraldii although the habit 
of the Korean plant is spreading rather than upright. In color the flowers are in bud, 
corolla- tube Hay's Lilac (xxxvii.), corolla-lobes Tourmaline Pink (xxxviii.); when 
expanded Pale Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) tinged with Hay's Lilac (xxxvii.); anthers Reed 
Yellow (xxx.), inserted at middle of corolla-tube. The winter-buds are obovoid with 
acute apex, the flower bud % in. long more or less, the scales dark purplish with some- 
times reddish brown margins, lustrous, acute, the lower pair much shorter than the upper 
pairs, glabrous or puberulous, sometimes ciliolate, keeled. The leaf-scar much raised, 
shield-shaped, conspicuous, large; the bundle-trace semicircular. (The notes on the 
color of the flowers were taken from a plant growing at Mr. Walter Hunnewell's, Wellesley, 
Massachusetts, which was raised from seed collected by Mr. E. H. Wilson; the notes on 
the winter buds were taken from a plant (no. 10,202) growing in the Arnold Arboretum.) 



SYRINGA OBLATA 187 

Habitat: Korea. 

This species was observed at its fruiting stage in 191 1 by Dr. Nakai who, in 
his "Flora Koreana," confused it with 6*. amurensis Ruprecht. In the same work, 
in a postscript, he corrects this error upon being informed that u Syringa japonica 
is identical with S. amurensis" and notes: "my fruit-bearing S. amurensis is not 
the [this] species, but belongs to S. oblata Lindl." In 1918 he cites his S. amurensis 
and his S. oblata as synonyms of S. dilatata. It was six years after this Lilac had 
been first seen by Nakai that it was introduced to cultivation in this country 
for seed (no. 9232) collected by E. H. Wilson on his trip to eastern Asia in 191 7- 
1918 was received at the Arnold Arboretum in September, 191 7. A note on the 
herbarium specimen of this number (no. 9232) states that it was taken from a bush 
1-6 ft. tall with wine-colored autumn leaves, "common on slate rocks and limestone 
from 35 miles west of Yeiko," Korea. 

Nakai's description oiS. dilatata, translated, reads: A shrub to 2 m. tall, branch- 
ing from the base; bark grayish with obscure lenticels, on the branches of the year 
brown or reddish brown; the leaves opposite, petioles 2-2.5 cm. long, very broad 
ovate or ovate, subcordate or truncate at the base, acuminate at apex, above very 
bright green, beneath green, 4.5 cm. long by 4.5 cm. broad " (7 : 6, 6.5-4.3, 12 : 8, 1 1- 
8.5, 7.5-7, 7-4 etc.)," very glabrous; the buds ovoid; the inflorescences erect at top 
of branches of the previous year, commonly from axillary pairs of buds, ovoid in 
outline; rhachis pulverulent; lower bracts oblanceolate, colored at the apex, the 
upper very small; pedicels 0.2-2 mm. long; flowers fragrant; calyx acutely four- 
toothed, pulverulent; corolla purple- violet, very handsome; tube 10-13 mm - l° n gi 
lobes ovate, 4-6 mm. long; stamens inserted ["stamine inserta"]; capsule 9-15 
mm. long, chestnut colored, shining, oblong, acuminate. 

Wilson writes in the "Journal of the Arnold Arboretum": "On the mudshales 
and limestone a little to the northwest of Keijyo, grows a Lilac {Syringa dilatata 
Nakai) which opens its panicles of palest lilac tinted flowers early in spring. It is 
a bush of good habit often twelve feet high and nearly as broad with dark green 
leathery foliage which colors finely in autumn. Examples two feet high bear 
flowers." 

On a cultivated specimen (no. 8430) gathered in the General Government Garden 
at Keiki on May 21, 191 7, Wilson notes that it is a bush 6-10 ft. tall, with fragrant 
lilac flowers and twiggy branches, commonly cultivated around Keijyo. The 
Abbe Faurie's fruiting specimen (no. 516), examples of which I have seen both 
in the Arnold Arboretum and in the herbarium of the Museum of Natural History, 
Paris, and which Lingelsheim cites among specimens of his S. oblata var. a typica, 
appears to be this variety. The collector mentions it as common on the cliffs of 
Kan ouen to, in Korea, where he collected it in July, 1901. 

At its best, this is to me one of the most beautiful of all the Lilacs although every 
specimen is not of equal decorative value. Those at the Arnold Arboretum are 
inferior up to the present time to a plant growing at Mr. Walter Hunnewell's, 



188 THE LILAC 

Wellesley, Massachusetts. This plant was raised from Mr. Wilson's seed and 
bloomed profusely in 1924 and 1925. It is now a plant about five feet tall, well 
filled out from base to top and considerably broader than tall. In mid-May it 
is covered with large, graceful, open clusters of flowers of a pale lilac color; un- 
fortunately these have little fragrance. The foliage is handsome, thin in texture 
when young, but becoming leathery as on the wild specimens described by Mr. 
Wilson; the leaves droop slightly on their long stalks and are not borne so stiffly 
as those of S. oblata. The young shoots and leaves in spring are tinged with bronze, 
a color which returns to the leaves in the autumn; they are glabrous, although the 
inflorescence is sparingly short-glandular-tipped pubescent. The flowers have 
exceptionally long and slender corolla- tubes, and the corolla-lobes are long and 
narrow with a cucullate, pointed apex, and, as in the variety Giraldii, they curl 
backward soon after opening. When expanded the corolla is nearly % of an inch 
in diameter. The anthers are not visible in the open flower. 

On November 18, 1925, Mr. F. L. Skinner of Dropmore, Manitoba, Canada, 
wrote me as follows: "In 1921 I crossed S. dilatata [=S. oblata var. dilatata] with 
S. vulgaris (both ways) and have over eighty seedlings; these show the influence 
of S. dilatata both in the bud and formation and the foliage. I opened one plumb 
bud this autumn and found it was a flower bud. They will probably flower freely 
in 1927." In August, 1927, a flowering specimen of this cross was sent to Professor 
Sargent. Mr. Skinner then wrote: "... its chief interest is that it is, I believe, 
the first hybrid of this parentage to reach the flowering stage. I have quite a num- 
ber of these hybrids and they show considerable variation in foliage and habit." 
In July, 1927, Mr. Skinner sent me a photograph of one of these plants in bloom. 
The color of the dried specimen is well preserved and contains more blue than I 
have found present in the flowers of living plants of this variety which have been 
examined. Except for this character which may indicate the S. vulgaris strain 
(I do not know what form of the Common Lilac was used in the cross) the dried 
specimen and the photograph look much like S. oblata var. dilatata. Should this 
prove to be a true hybrid it should be classified with Lemoine's hybrid, 5. hyacinthi- 
flora, the parents of which are S. oblata, or its variety Giraldii, and 5. vulgaris. 

A variety with white flowers known only as a cultivated plant is: 

Syringa oblata var. affinis (L. Henry) Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 
i.-ii. 88 (1920). — Rehder, Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 755 (1927); in Jour. Arnold 
Arb. ix. no (1928). See Note, page 192. 

Syringa affinis L. Henry in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 11. 731 (1901); in Rev. Hort. 
1908, 301, fig. 112. — Schneider in Wien. 111. Gartenz. xxvm. 101 (1903); in Bot. 
Jahrb. xxxvi. Beibl. no. 82, p. 87 (1905), excluding Giraldi specimen no. 737; 111. 
Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 773, figs. 485 g-i, 486 f-h (1911); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. 
Ges. no. 20, 227, 228 (191 1); in Silva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 360 (1913). — 
Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 3, May 16 (191 1); n. s. vni. 23 (1922). — Bean, 
Trees and Shrubs Brit. Isles, 11. 569 (1914). — Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxm. 153, 



SYRINGA OBLATA 189 

154 (1916); Aristocrats of the Garden, 215, 219 (1917). — Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 172 (1916). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3301 
(1917). — Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 404 
(1922). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 484 (1923). — Stares, 
Cerines (Syringa L.), 4, 6, (1926), reprinted from Darzkopibas, n. (1926). 

Syringa oblata var. alba Hort. according to Rehder in Bailey, Cycl. Amer. Hort. iv. 
1763 (1902). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 414 (1903), as 
a form. See Note, page 192. 

S[yringa\ oblata var. alba Bean, Trees and Shrubs Brit. Isles, 11. 569 (1914), as a synonym. 

S[yringa\ oblata var. a typica Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 88(1920), 
in part. 

S[yringa] oblata var. a typica f. alba Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 
88 (1920), name only. 

Distinguished from the type by its more slender, open habit; by its smaller leaves 
which are frequently truncate at the base and finely pubescent and ciliolate when young 
although commonly glabrous at maturity; and by its white flowers. 

Known only as a cultivated plant; commonly grown in Chinese gardens. 

With the type S. oblata this white variety may have been brought from China 
to England in 1856 by Robert Fortune after his visit to that country in the years 
1853 to 1856. Fortune is quoted by John Lindley as follows: "There is a white 
variety equally interesting, found in the same country, which I have succeeded in 
getting home alive, and which is now under the care of Messrs. E. G. Henderson 
and Son, St. John's Wood." Fortune notes that like S. oblata, this variety should 
be hardy in England, and that like the type, the Chinese graft it on the Privet 
(Ligustrum lucidum). It appears doubtful whether distribution of this variety 
was ever made by the Henderson nursery. Bretschneider refers to it as much 
cultivated in Peking but he had never observed it in a wild state in the Peking 
mountains, although, like S. oblata, it "seems to be wild in Manchuria." Numerous 
authors refer to the existence of a white variety. Beissner, Schelle and Zabel 
mention S. oblata alba Hort. as one of two forms of 5. oblata, — the second being 
the form rubro-coertdea Hort. 5. oblata var. alba is, however, commonly cited as 
a synonym of 5. affinis, here called S. oblata var. affinis. See Note, page 192. 

Without giving the plant a name L. Henry in "Le Jardin" of 1894 (viii. 162, 
1894) writes of what he believes may be a white form of S. oblata growing at the 
Museum of Natural History, Paris; it was raised from seed received in 1880 from 
Dr. Bretschneider, medical attache of the Russian Legation at Peking, and flowered 
for the first time in 1891. Henry calls attention to the fact that the seedlings 
raised showed no color variation and he therefore looks upon it as a wild form or 
one not modified by cultivation. In 1901 he described this Lilac for the first time: 
"Ce Lilas rappelle beaucoup le S. oblata par la forme des feuilles, par la forme et 
la grandeur des capsules, et surtout par l'extreme precocite de la floraison. II 
s'en distingue assez nettement par sa taille plus elevee, ses rameaux plus greles 
et plus dejetes; par ses bourgeons et ses jeunes pousses vert jaunatre; par l'aspect 



190 THE LILAC 

terne (non lustre) et le coloris vert pale des feuilles; par leur pubescence, au moins 
au debut de la vegetation; par leur moindre epaisseur et leur moindre consistance; 
enfin, par les inflorescences plus longues, plus legeres, beaucoup moins fournies, et 
toujours blanc pur. Bien qu'il fleurisse a peu pres en meme temps que le S. oblata, 
ce Lilas est moins sujet a souffrir des froids tardifs, et il s'epanouit generalement 
bien. II presente, d'autre part, une assez grande ressemblance avec le Lilas 
commun; il en differe surtout par la forme de ses feuilles; par sa tres grande pre- 
cocite; par ses fleurs toujours blanc pur, a tube plus court (environs 10 millim., 
contre 10 a 12 millim. de diametre du limbe), a divisions arrondies, avec bords 
releves et extremite en capuchon, ne s'etalant jamais completement; par ses in- 
florescences beaucoup plus maigres et plus laches et par son aspect general plus 
grele et moins rigide." In a foot-note Henry adds: "On pourrait peut-etre l'appeler 
S. affinis, a cause de ses rapports avec le S. oblata d'un part et de S. vulgaris d'autre 
part." 

The Potanin specimen collected on May 5, 1885, in western Kansu and received 
at Kew from the Botanic Garden, St. Petersburg, was referred by Hooker (Bot. 
Mag. cxxvh. t. 7806, 1901) to 5. oblata and determined by Schneider as 5. affinis 
Henry. Through the courtesy of Dr. A. W. Hill this was forwarded to the Arnold 
Arboretum for examination where it was determined by Mr. Rehder as the wild 
plant S. oblata var. Giraldii. 

This variety was collected also by Frank N. Meyer and has been distributed 
by the Bureau of Plant Introduction of the U. S. Department of Agriculture as 
S. P. I. no. 23,031. Meyer's note in the Department's Bulletin (no. 142, 57, 1909) 
reads: "From Fengtai, near Peking, Chihli, China, (no. 693, Mar[ch] 31, 1908). A 
medium-sized, white flowering lilac. See preceding number (S. P. I. no. 23030) for 
remarks. Chinese name 'Pai ting hsien.' " The note, on the no. 23,030 referred to, 
states that it is a "purple-flowered lilac," and this is presumably the type 5. oblata, 
although a specimen of this number in the herbarium of the Arnold Arboretum 
which was collected at the Department's Field Station at Chico, California, appears 
to have white flowers. Grafts from both these numbers have been received at the 
Arboretum and upon flowering their classification may be determined with greater 
certainty. Meyer notes them as "drought resistant," and often grafted on Ligus- 
trum lucidum. In his "Liste des Essences ligneuses observees dans le Honan 
septentrional" (30, 1922) J. Hers cites as a Chinese name for 5. affinis [ = S. oblata 
var. affinis] "pai ting siang." 

In the herbarium at Kew Gardens, is a flowering specimen collected by Robert 
Fortune in April, 1854, which appears to be this variety. Schneider considered it 
to be S. oblata but the flowers are indicated as white. He cites (Bot. Jahrb., 1. c.) 
as S. affinis, the flowering specimen (no. 737) collected by the Rev. Giuseppe 
Giraldi. Lingelsheim includes this specimen, which he examined in Florence, in 
his S. oblata var. a. typica. At a later date (111. Handb. Laubholzk., 1. c.) Schneider 
notes that his classification of this species was based chiefly upon the minute 



SYRINGA OBLATA 191 

glandular pubescence of the young growth. According to information supplied me 
by Dr. Pampanini, this number, which is in the Biondi-Giraldi Herbarium at Flor- 
ence, Italy, was at one time determined by Schneider as S. Dielsiana [ =S. micro- 
phylla Diels], and there is no record of his S. affinis determination. The collector's 
notes state that the plant was from northern Shensi, "raccolto presso una casa a 
Lu-tun"; it is dated March 25, 1891 and was evidently a cultivated plant. I 
consider that in form of inflorescence and of foliage this specimen more nearly 
represents the wild plant Giraldii and so classify it. The minute glandular pubes- 
cence of the young growth noted by Schneider is characteristic of the variety 
Giraldii also. 

Among specimens from cultivated plants which are in the herbarium of the 
Arnold Arboretum are the following from China: N. H. Cowdry (no. 1010) from 
the Temple grounds, Wofussun, Chihli; J. F. Rock (no. 12,159) fr° m the T'ao 
River basin, Choni, southwestern Kansu, altitude 8500 ft.; the shrub is noted as 
15 ft. tall, spreading, with white flowers; it was growing at a lamasery. 

S. oblata var. affinis was at one time growing in the Arnold Arboretum but the 
original plant has disappeared. E. H. Wilson writes in 1916: "Each succeeding 
year there is a close race between two Chinese species (5. affinis and S. oblata) to be 
the first Lilac to blossom and usually the first-named wins." The first plant of the 
variety affinis to be received at the Arnold Arboretum was sent by Mr. E. T. Wil- 
liams from Peking in April, 1904, and at present there is in the nursery a young 
plant (no. 5320-1 Arn. Arb.) grown from cuttings taken from the original on January 
8, 1920. 

The variety affinis is chiefly distinguished from S. oblata by its white rather 
than purplish flowers, and by its smaller leaves which are, when young, finely 
downy rather than glabrous, as in the type. 

Early Lilac has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized 
Plant Names," which classifies this Lilac as 5. affinis, a distinct species. 

Another variety, not known to be in cultivation, has been described as: 

Syringa oblata var. hupehensis Pampanini in Nuov. Giorn. Bot. Ital. n. s. xvn. 690 
(1910). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. i-n. 88 (1920). 

Habitat: China : province of Hupeh. 

This variety was founded by Dr. Pampanini upon the fruiting specimen (no. 
1806) collected in Hupeh, China, by the Rev. P. C. Silvestri at "Monte Triona, 
alt. 1950 m.," on July 3, 1907. His description states that it differs from the type 
in the broad ovate-cordate leaves, 5^-7 cm. long and 3;Hr~6 cm. broad, at the 
fruiting stage more or less pubescent beneath, with margins ciliolate under the 
lens, with capsule rather short, beaked, n mm. long. 

The principal distinction which Dr. Pampanini notes is the pubescent character 
of the under side of the mature leaves; those of the variety Giraldii, a spontaneous 
variety of S. oblata from the provinces of Shensi, Shansi, and Kansu, being glabrous 



192 THE LILAC 

at maturity. Fragments and a photograph of this specimen were kindly sent me 
by Dr. Pampanini. The collector's notes do not state whether the plant was wild 
or cultivated; it was presumably wild. 

Since this is the only variety of S. oblata showing this strongly pubescent char- 
acter upon the mature leaves, and since the flowers are still unknown I have retained 
Dr. Pampanini's classification. It is possible that further knowledge of the wild 
variety Giraldii may lead to the conclusion that its glabrous character at maturity 
is inconstant, permitting the union of the two varieties. 

A garden form, differing from typical S. oblata merely in the color of its flowers, 
is: 

Rubro-coerulea Hort. according to Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz- 
Ben. 414 (1903), name only, as a form. 

Syringa oblata var. a typica f. rubro-coerulea Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, 
pt. 1-11. 88 (1920), name only. 

K. Koch (Dendr. 11. pt. 1. 266, 1872) notes that among forms of S. oblata there is "eine 
mit purpurvioletten . . . Bliithen"; this is possibly the same. Koehne (Deutsch. 
Dendr. 500, 1893) writes of S. oblata: "Blumenkrone purpurviolett, hellpurpurn, weiss, " 
— his white variety is of course S. oblata var. affinis. Rehder (Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.- 
Zeit. xrv. 206, 1899), also writing of S. oblata, adds: "Es gibt von dieser Art auch Varie- 
taten mit dunkleren, purpurvioletten . . . Blumen, die ich jedoch noch nicht gesehen 
habe." 



Note. Mr. Rehder has recently noted that the oldest varietal name for the 
variety of S. oblata, here called affinis, is variety alba. Although affinis is the oldest 
specific name for this Lilac according to the International Rules of Nomenclature 
the oldest varietal name must stand. This fact was not noted until the book was 
in press. 



Plate CVII 




SYRINGA HYACLNTHIFLORA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 15,659) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 



Plate CVIII 




i 



SYRINGA HYACINTHIFLORA 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 15,650) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. April 29, 1926. 



Plate CIX 




SYRINGA HYACINTHIFLORA 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 15,659) 

Flower clusters. May 21, 1924. 



Plate CX 




< 
fa 
o 

a 

H 

S5 

— 

X 

< 

o 

04 



o 


(N 


u-> 


o\ 


vO 


tH 


VO 


~ 


w 


M 




<S 


6 




£ 


§ 


3 




-*-* 






t/5 


o 


0> 


)-i 


cfl 


< 


3 



2 
'o 

c 



w < =2 



Plate CXI 




<: 
M 


iJ-> 




o 


^. 


vr: 


_) 


m 


CN 


ta 


1-1 


— 


i— i 






H 


5 


*- 


H 


"" 


O 


a 


p 


rQ 


^H 




r— 


U 


5 


O 


< 


o 


> 


>H 


t- 


o 


a 


o 


Z 


<! 


< 




o 







a 


-^ 


—j 


KH 






« 


c 


— 


CO 


< 





Plate CXII 




SYRINGA HYACINTHIFLORA "LAMARTINE" 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,375) 

Winter buds, enlarged. January, 1926. 



Plate CXIII 




SYRINGA HYACINTHIFLORA "LAMARTINE' 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,375) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. April 30, 1926. 



Plate CXIV 




SYRINGA HYACINTHIFLORA "VAUBAN" 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 7625) 

Flower clusters. May 2, 1924. 



Plate CXY 




SYRINGA HYACINTHIFLORA "MIRABEAU' 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 7937) 

Flower clusters. May 9, 1925. 



Plate CXVI 




1/5 
W 
H 
OS 
< 

u 

w 

Q 



« 
O 
.-) 

I— I 

a 
to 



o 

og 



o 

l-l 



O 









K < 



as 
< 
to 

C/3 



Ji ° 



3 



0) 

o 



Plate CXVI1 




SYRINGA HYACINTHIFLORA "LAMARTINE" 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,375) 

Fruit, enlarged. January, 1926. 



Plate CXVIII 




w 






s 






>— 1 






H 






« 






<: 


LO 




S 


t^ 




<: 


<^ 




(j 




© 


< 


6 




« 


r^ 


„ 


o 


p 


>> 


_) 


^ 






— ' 

o 


03 


5 


^ 




i— < 


< 


■• 


< 


— 


J— 


>H 


»-T* 


rt 


ffi 


C 


"v^ 


< 


<; 




O 


* — * 




£ 






HH 






« 






>H 






Crt 







X SYRINGA HYACINTHIFLORA 

A hybrid between S. oblata Lindley and S. vulgaris Linnaeus, of garden origin, is: 

X Syringa hyacinthiflora Lemfoine] according to Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.- 
Zeit. xrv. 206 (1899); in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3301 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees 
and Shrubs 755 (1927). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 415 (1903). — 
Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 3, May 16 (191 1); no. 54, May 14 (1914); n. s. 111. 
. 22 (1917); v. 18 (1919). — Schneider, HI. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 773 (1911). — Wilson 
in Gard. Mag. xxiii. 155 (1916); Aristocrats of the Garden, 229 (1917). — Silva Tarouca 
and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 404 (1922). — Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey 
in Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923), as a synonym. — Stares, Cerines (Syringa L.), 31 (1926), 
reprinted from Darzkopibas, n. (1926). — G. Hegi, 111. Fl. Mittel-Eur. v. pt. ni., 1911 
(1927). 

Syringa hyacinthiflora flore pleno [Lemoine according to] Carriere in Rev. Hort. 1876, 

299; 1877, 2 79- — E. Morren in Belg. Hort. xxvin. 175 (1878). 
Syringa hyacinthiflora plena Lemoine, Cat. no. 78, 6 (1878). — V. Lemoine in Garden 

and Forest, n. 326 (1889); in Gard. Chron. ser. 3, vi. 132 (1889); in Hamburg. 

Gart. Blumenz. xlv. 459 (1889); in Jardin, in. 201 (1889). — Foussat in Jardin, 

xv. 281 (1901). — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 321. — Grignan in Rev. Hort. 1907, 

14. — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 378 (1907). 
Syringa hybrida hyacinthiflora plena Lemoine, Cat. 94 (1883). — V. Lemoine in Garden 

and Forest, n. 326 (1889); in Gard. Chron. ser. 3, vr. 132 (1889); in Hamburg. 

Gart. Blumenz. xlv. 459 (1889); in Jardin, in. 201 (1889). — Carriere and Andre 

in Rev. Hort. 1889, 410. — E. Lemoine in Garden, xxxix. 91 (1891); in Jardin, vi. 

152 (1892). — L. Henry in Jardin, vni. 176 (1894); in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, 

ser. 4, 11. 738 (1901). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 232 (1917). 
Syringa vulgaris hyacinthiflora Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885), name only. 
Syringa hybrida hyacinthiflora V. Lemoine in Garden and Forest, n. 326 (1889); in Gard. 

Chron. ser. 3, vi. 132 (1889); in Hamburg. Gart. Blumenz. xlv. 459 (1889); in 

Jardin, m. 201 (1889). 
S[yringa] oblata X S\yringa] vulgaris Schneider in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 20, 

228 (1911). 
Syringa oblata var. a typica f. hyacinthiflora Hort. according to Lingelsheim in Engler, 

Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 88 (1920). 

This hybrid was produced by Mr. Victor Lemoine of Nancy, France. He crossed 
artificially one of the first recorded double forms of the Common Lilac, Azurea 
plena, with pollen taken from various single forms of the same species such as 
Ville de Troyes, Sanguinea, etc., and from that of the species S. oblata. Certain 
seedlings raised showed no trace of 5. oblala, — these were the first of Mr. Lemoine's 
fine strain of double and single forms of the Common Lilac, — but some of its 

193 



194 THE LILAC 

characters were clearly apparent in one plant which Lemoine considered to be a 
true hybrid and introduced, in his catalogue for 1878, as Syringa hyacinthiflora 
plena. 

His original description reads: "Thyrses de 15 centimetres de hauteur sur 10 
de largeur a la base, flexibles, fleurs moyennes, ouvertes, doubles, formees de 10 
a. 12 petales bien imbriquees, forme d'une jacinthe double en miniature, d'un joli 
rose lilace avec les boutons rouges. Cette variete bien superieure a l'ancien S. 
azurea plena, provient d'un croisement de celui-ci par le S. oblata (Chine). Sa 
floraison precede de 10 jours les especes communes." 

Carriere who first wrote of this hybrid in 1876 quotes a letter from Mr. Lemoine, 
who had sent him specimens of the plant: "Mon Lilas fleurit pour la premiere fois 
sur la plante de semis; il est d'une vigueur moyenne; greffe, il me donnera sans 
doute des thyrses plus volumineuses. Quoi qu'il en soit, il provient d'une graine 
recolt6e sur la variete azurea plena. La fecondation n'a pu s'operer que tres-dif- 
ficilement, et au moyen de l'ablation du petale qui recouvre constamment, et 
dans chaque fleur, le stigmate de la fleur de Yazurea, et ces fleurs, depourvues 
d'etamines n'ont qu'un pistil souvent atrophic, de sorte que sur plus de cent fleurs 
qui ont ete operees, je n'ai obtenu que sept graines; mais l'annee suivante, j'ai 
ete plus heureux: j'ai recolte trente graines fertiles. La fecondation a done eu 
lieu avec le pollen des etamines a fleurs simples pris sur de belles varietes, tout 
particulierement sur l'espece oblata, qui est plus native de huit jours que les Lilas 
communs (Syringa vulgaris). Mon gain semble provenir de l'influence de Y oblata 
dont il a tous les caracteres, plus des fleurs doubles. Des quarante plantes de 
semis que je possede, trois seulement ont fleuri; le premier (celui dont je vous 
addresse un echantillon) etait a. fleurs doubles. — Le semis date de cinq annees." 
Carriere adds: "Le qualicatif hyacinthiflora a ete donne par M. Lemoine a cause 
de la fleur qui rappelle celle d'une 'Jacinthe en miniature.'" 

This hybrid, now called S. hyacinthiflora, has foliage intermediate between 
that of its parents; the bronze-like color of the leaves in spring and autumn, and 
the early blooming season, in late April or early May in the neighborhood of Boston, 
Massachusetts, are characteristic of 5. oblata, while the double fragrant flowers 
are inherited from 5. vulgaris. The plant flowered for the first time in 1876 accord- 
ing to L. Henry (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, 1. c). It was exhibited, Mr. E. Lemoine 
states (Garden, 1. c), at a meeting of the Royal Horticultural Society, London, on 
September 9th, 1890. 

For an account of the difficulties encountered by Mr. Lemoine in this hybridiza- 
tion see also the form of the Common Lilac, Azurea plena. 

"Standardized Plant Names" has adopted the approved common names of 
Hyacinth for S. hyacinthiflora, and of Double Hyacinth for S. hyacinthiflora plena; 
until Mr. Emile Lemoine introduced in 191 1 the first of his new race of early hybrid 
Lilacs (S. oblata var. Giraldii X S. vulgaris) , which are here for the first time called 
S. hyacinthiflora hybrids, this plant was only known in a double form. 



SYRINGA HYACINTHIFLORA 195 

E. Morren calls this the Lilas double a, fleurs de Jacinthe. Presumably the 
Lilas de Jacinthe which appears in such catalogues as Baltet's (1900-1901, 27) 
where it is described as "lilas tres pale, tres pr6coce," is this hybrid. 

Notes on the plant in the Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Holm Lea, 
Brookline, Massachusetts, in April, 1907; no. 15,659 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, 
with two or more corollas, medium size, corolla-tube cylindric, corolla-lobes pointed 
at apex, sometimes cucullate; tone intermediate; color in bud at first Light 
Perilla Purple, later corolla- tube Purplish Lilac or Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvn.), 
corolla-lobes Vernonia Purple (xxxvni.); when expanded, Light Lobelia Violet 
tinged with Purplish Lilac (xxxvn.). Clusters small, about 4 in. long, well- 
filled, ordinarily from two lateral buds at the end of a branchlet, but occasion- 
ally from as many as five pairs of buds, exceedingly fragrant and early. The young 
growth and inflorescences are tinged Chestnut Brown (xrv.) and covered for a time 
with glandular-tipped pubescence. Winter-buds obovoid with acute apex, flower 
bud % in. long more or less, scales purplish with narrow reddish brown margins, 
lustrous, acute, keeled and forming a markedly four-sided bud, glabrous. Leaf- 
scar slightly raised, shield-shaped, inconspicuous, medium size; bundle-trace 
slightly curved. 

For the cross 5. oblata var. dilatata with S. vulgaris, see S. oblata var. dilatata. 

Hybrids between garden forms of 5. oblata var. Giraldii and S. vulgaris have 
been produced by Mr. Emile Lemoine of Nancy, France. They are most nearly 
related to Mr. Victor Lemoine's earlier hybrid S. hyacinthiflora (5. oblata X 5. 
vulgaris) and as a race must bear that name. But since to produce these more 
recent hybrids there were available as parents the modern, showier forms of the 
Common Lilac, and S. oblata var. Giraldii, — far handsomer than the type S. oblata, 
— the new race is superior both in size and character of individual flower and of 
inflorescence to the earlier hybrid. As in the type S. hyacinthiflora, the foliage is 
intermediate between that of the parents; the early flowers testify to their S. oblata 
strain, while their color variations and form, in particular that of the double 
sorts, are characters inherited from the garden forms of 5. vulgaris. 

The first mention of the new race appeared in the Lemoine catalogue for 191 1 
(no. 179, 2, 191 1) under the title "Lilas hybrides de Syringa vulgaris et de S. 
Giraldii" Numerous other references have appeared, among them the following: 
Rev. Hort. 1911, 538. — Steffen in Gartenflora, lxiii. 15 (1913). — Havemeyer 
in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3301 
(1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 755 (1927). — Sargent in Bull. Arnold Arb. 
v. 18 (1919). — Dunbar in Florists Exch. September 22, 1923, 822. — Meyer in 
Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xl. 375 (1925). 

Judging by the plants in the Arnold Arboretum, where seven out of the fourteen 
forms introduced up to the present time by Mr. Lemoine are now good sized 
plants, they are exceptionally rapid, vigorous growers, requiring frequent cutting 



196 THE LILAC 

back to prevent their becoming "leggy" and in order that their flower clusters may 
be produced at a height where their beauty and fragrance may be enjoyed. Such 
severe pruning will moreover tend to produce slightly larger flowers and larger 
clusters. The young shoots and leaves when they first appear as well as the branches 
of the inflorescence, the calyx and the pedicel, are tinged with a bronze-like color 
close to Diamine Brown (xin.), and are covered with short, glandular-tipped 
pubescence. This coloring and the pubescence are to be found in the parent 
S. oblata var. Giraldii. The flower-clusters, which begin to open from the end of 
April to early May are almost over when those of the Common Lilac forms are at 
their best. They are frequently a foot long and even broader near the base, and of 
an open, widely branching habit, often with small leaves at the base of their 
subdivisions. When the large flowers expand the clusters, though well filled, 
are not overcrowded. The corolla-lobes curl backward after they have been un- 
folded for a short time as do those of the variety Giraldii. The range of color is 
not great up to the present time, all being intermediate to pale in tone and as a 
rule of a lavender color which in some forms has slightly more red than in others. 
Neither a truly dark nor a white Lilac has been as yet introduced in this group. 
Of the forms which I have seen the two which show the greatest individuality in 
color are Necker, a fine pink, and Villars, dark in flower bud but expanding much 
paler. The latter has darker winter-buds than the other forms of this group, and 
in color these are close to those of the parent 5. oblata var. Giraldii. Most of 
the single forms growing in the Arnold Arboretum bear a marked resemblance 
to each other and are difficult to distinguish. There are three double or semi- 
double forms, — Berryer, Claude Bernard and Vauban. 

The forms of the hybrid S. hyacinthijlora which follow, and which for con- 
venience are arranged alphabetically, comprise the introductions to date of the 
firm of V. Lemoine et fils, of Nancy, France. The date of introduction precedes 
Mr. Lemoine's original description. Most were announced under the title "Early 
Lilacs. Hybrids of Syringa vulgaris and S. Giraldii,' ' without any special group 
name; occasionally they have appeared in the catalogue's list of Common Lilac 
forms when their parentage has merely been given in their description. They 
are: 

Berryer Lemoine, Cat. no. 185, 41 (1913-1914), "Tiges hautes, longs thyrses de fleurs 
souvent semi-doubles, mauve." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). — Dunbar 
in Florists Exch. September 22, 1923, 830. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in November, 1922; no. 11,743 Am. Arb.). Flowers single or semi-double ; 
tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Corinthian Purple to Eupatorium Purple 
(xxxvin.) ; when expanded Argyle Purple to Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.). The open flowers 
are irregular in form, with twisted or curling corolla-lobes. These are broad, round, 
sometimes with a pointed, sometimes with a blunt apex. The anthers are frequently 
visible in the single flowers. 



SYRINGA HYACINTHIFLORA 197 

Buffon Lemoine, Cat. no. 195, 18 (1921-1922), "Elegant clusters of single flowers 
with reflexed lobes, mauve pink." 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 195. 

Catinat Lemoine, Cat. no. 196, 19 (1922-1923), "Very tall shrub carrying immense 
branched panicles of large pink single flowers." 

A plant of this form is growing in the Arnold Arboretum but has not yet bloomed 
(plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, N. Y., in October, 1925; no. 19,119 
Arn. Arb). 

Notes on plant in collection of T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, New York (plant received 
from Lemoine in 1922). Flowers single, medium size; corolla-lobes narrow, creased in 
the center, pointed at apex, curling backward after they have been expanded for a short 
time; anthers prominent; tone pale; color in bud Tourmaline Pink to Laelia Pink 
(xxxviii.); when expanded Pale Vinaceous-Lilac tinged with Light Vinaceous-Lilac 
(xliv.) without, Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.) within. Clusters large, loose, open. The 
flowers are paler without than within. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 196. 

Claude Bernard Lemoine, Cat. no. 189, 23 (1915), "A tall shrub attaining 10 feet in 
a short time, long panicles of large double or semi-double flowers, bright mauve lilac. 
In 1914 this variety was in full flower April 15." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 
(1917). — Dunbar in Florists Exch. September 22, 1923, 831. 

In the United States the flowering season is somewhat later than in France. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in April, 1917; no. 7624 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, with two corollas 
and additional lobes at throat, only rarely semi-double ; corolla-lobes broadest above the 
middle, rounded, or pointed at the apex; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep 
Purplish Vinaceous (xliv.) to Light Perilla Purple to Argyle Purple (xxxvn.); when 
expanded Hay's Lilac (xxxvn.) without, Light Mauve to Pale Mauve (xxv.) marked 
Bluish Lavender (xxxvi.) near throat within. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 189. 

This form is mentioned in "Standardized Plant Names" (485, 1923) without indica- 
tion of its hybrid origin. The paragraph prefacing the list in which it appears is mis- 
leading and would indicate that it was a form of S. vulgaris. 

Descartes Lemoine, Cat. no. 190, 25 (1916), "Large panicles of single mauve pink 
flowers, extra floriferous." — Dunbar in Florists Exch., September 22, 1923, 830. 

See Plate cxvi. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in April, 1917; no. 7868 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single; corolla-lobes broad, 
rounded or pointed at the apex; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Wood Brown 
(xl.) to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.); when expanded Pale Lilac tinged with Hay's Lilac 
and marked with Lobelia Violet (xxxvn.). The flowers of this form are slightly pinker 
than most of those of this group. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 190. 

This form is mentioned in "Standardized Plant Names" (486, 1923) without indica- 



198 THE LILAC 

tion of its hybrid origin. The paragraph prefacing the list in which it appears is mis- 
leading and would indicate that it was a form of S. vulgaris. 

Lamartine Lemoine, Cat. no. 179, 6 (1911), "Belles panicules d'une grande legerete, 
fleurs simples, rose mauve." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). — Dunbar 
in Florists Exch. September 22, 1923, 830. — Rehder, Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 

755 (1927)- 

See Plates cxn., cxiii., cxvn., cxviii. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in April, 1917; no. 17,357 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, corolla-lobes oval, 
rounded at apex; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Helle- 
bore Red to Tourmaline Pink (xxxviii.) ; when expanded Purplish Lilac with markings 
of Lobelia Violet on corolla-lobes within, Purplish Lilac with occasional margins of Pale 
Lobelia Violet (xxxvn.) without. This is one of the earliest of the group to flower in 
the Arboretum. 

Miss Isabella Preston, producer of the S. Prestoniae hybrids, wrote me in November, 
1925: "I have several seedlings of S. vulgaris Negro X Lamartine which is one of Le- 
moine's S. Giraldii hybrids. These crosses were made in 1922 and have not yet bloomed." 
When in Ottawa in June, 1927, the seedlings were out of bloom but Miss Preston tells 
me that they showed great color variation. 

This form is mentioned in "Standardized Plant Names" (486, 1923) without indica- 
tion of its hybrid origin. The paragraph prefacing the list in which it appears is mis- 
leading and would indicate that it was a form of S. vulgaris. 

Louvois Lemoine, Cat. no. 195, 19 (1921-1922), "Voluminous clusters of large single 
flowers, deep violet purple with bluish shades." 

Notes on plant in collection of T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, N. Y. (plant re- 
ceived from Lemoine in 192 1). Flowers single, with a tendency to produce additional 
lobes in regular corolla, intermediate to large in size; corolla-lobes narrow, unsymmetrical ; 
anthers conspicuous; tone intermediate; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to Magenta (xxvi.) ; 
when expanded Eupatorium Purple to Tourmaline Pink with margins of Pale Laelia 
Pink without, Eupatorium Purple with markings of Pale Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) at junc- 
tion of corolla-lobes within. Clusters with broad basal subdivisions; these are held 
erect and the cluster therefore appears compact. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 195. 

Mirabeau Lemoine, Cat. no. 179, 6 (1911), "Bonnes panicules, fleurs tres grandes, 
simples, mauve rose lilace; la floraison commence vers le 25 avril." — Havemeyer in 
Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). — Dunbar in Florists Exch., September 22, 1923, 830. — 
Rehder, Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 755 (1927). 

See Plate cxv. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in April, 1917; no. 7625 Am. Arb.). Flowers single; tone intermediate to 
pale; color in bud Deep Hellebore Red (xxxviii.); when expanded Lobelia Violet to 
Hay's Lilac (xxxvii.) . The corolla-lobes are narrow, broadest at the middle, somewhat 
pointed at apex, occasionally cucullate; the anthers are hidden. This is one of the 
earliest of this group to flower in the Arboretum. 



SYRINGA HYACINTHIFLORA 199 

This form is mentioned in "Standardized Plant Names" (487, 1923) without indica- 
tion of its hybrid origin. The paragraph prefacing the list in which it appears is mislead- 
ing and would indicate that it was a form of ,S. vulgaris. 

Montesquieu Lemoine, Cat. no. 199 bis, 8 (July, 1926), "One of our showiest Giraldii 
hybrids, with huge panicles of round single flowers, purplish lilac, exceedingly free and 
floriferous, early." 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 199 bis. 

Necker Lemoine, Cat. no. 194, 18 (1920), "Single, pale pink flowers; one of the 
earliest." 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in November, 1921; no. 11,059 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, symmetrical, 
large, with cucullate corolla-lobes and anthers visible in the open flower; tone pale; color 
in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Rocellin Purple to Laelia Pink (xxxvni.) ; when expanded 
Laelia Pink both within and without turning to Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvni.) marked 
with considerable white near throat and on corolla-lobes within. Clusters broad at base, 
of good size, symmetrically filled but not crowded. Distinct from other plants of this 
group in the form of the corolla which is very similar to that of Marlyensis pallida and 
in the color of the flowers which is much like that found in Lucie Baltet, two forms of 
the Common Lilac. Unlike most of the Lilacs of this group the inflorescence, young 
shoots and foliage are scarcely tinged with bronze. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 194. 

Pascal Lemoine, Cat. no. 190, 25 (1916), "An exceedingly floriferous sort, single 
flowers of a pure lilac." — Dunbar in Florists Exch., September 22, 1923, 830. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in April, 1918; no. 7927 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single; tone intermediate to 
pale ; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) ; when expanded 
Ageratum Violet (xxxvn.) with streakings of Light Hyssop Violet (xxxvr.) on corolla- 
lobes within. The corolla-lobes are broad, round in form, abruptly pointed or rounded 
at apex and the anthers are frequently visible. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 190. 

This form is mentioned in "Standardized Plant Names" (487, 1923) without indica- 
tion of its hybrid origin. The paragraph prefacing the list in which the name appears 
is misleading and would indicate that it was a form of S. vulgaris. 

Turgot Lemoine, Cat. no. 194, 18 (1921-1922), "Broad panicles, single, round flowers, 
of a purplish rose passing to soft mauve, very striking." 

A plant (no. 11,061 Arn. Arb.) bearing this name was received at the Arnold Arboretum 
from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, N. Y., in November, 192 1. It bears such a close 
resemblance to the form Necker that I believe there must have been some confusion of 
labels ; both are still very young plants however. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 194. 

Vauban Lemoine, Cat. no. 185, 41 (1913-1914), "Tiges tres hautes, panicules dressees, 
fleurs moyennes, doubles, forme renoncule, rose mauve tendre, floribondite extraordi- 



200 THE LILAC 

naire." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). — Dunbar in Florists Exch., 
September 22, 1923, 820. 

See Plate cxrv. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in April, 1918; no. 7937 Am. Arb.). Flowers semidouble or double; corolla- 
lobes broad, rounded or obtusish at apex; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Ver- 
nonia Purple to Eupatorium Purple (xxxvin.) ; when expanded Argyle Purple to Light 
Pinkish Lilac (xxxvn.) without and within. 

This form is mentioned in "Standardized Plant Names" (488, 1923) without indica- 
tion of its hybrid origin. The paragraph prefacing the list in which the name appears is 
misleading and would indicate that it was a form of S. vulgaris. 

Villars Lemoine, Cat. no. 194, 18 (1920-1921), "Tall branches, long panicles, large 
single flowers, pinkish mauve fading to pale lilac." 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in November, 1921 ; no. 11,062 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single; tone intermedi- 
ate to pale; color in bud Dark Perilla Purple to Light Perilla Purple to Argyle Purple 
(xxxvn.) ; when expanded Purplish Lilac without, Purplish Lilac to Light Lobelia Violet 
(xxxvn.) within. The corolla-lobes are narrow, broadest at or above the middle, rounded 
or slightly pointed at apex, frequently curled or twisted, and the anthers are clearly 
visible in the open flower. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 194. 



Plate CXIX 











SYRINGA VULGARIS 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,363) 

Winter buds, enlarged. December, 1925. 






Plate CXX 








SYRINGA VULGARIS 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,363) 

Expanding buds, enlarged. April 30, 1926. 



Plate CXXI 




SYRINGA VULGARIS 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,363) 

Flower clusters. May 26, 1924. 



Plate CXXII 




SYRINGA VULGARIS 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,363) 

Fruit, enlarged. Picked August 19, 1924. 




SYRINGA VULGARIS 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,363) 

Bark. November, 1925. 



Plate CXXIV 




l*?;*& w 



SYRINGA VULGARIS "AMETHYST' 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 17,364) 

Flower clusters. June 2, 1924. 



Plate CXXV 




SYRINGA VULGARIS "DIDEROT" 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 7194) 

Flower clusters. June 2, 1924. 



Plate CXXVI 




SYRINGA VULGARIS "MME. F. MOREL" 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 10,602) 

Flower clusters. June 2, 1924. 



Plate CXXVII 




w 
S 

o _ 

^ o 

. -o 

f* o 



w 



o 



CO qj 

« O 

< -9 



O 



< 



> -o 

^ C 

O < 

CO 






c 

3 



en 

1-1 



1-4 

o 

o 



Plate CXXVII1 




SYRINGA VULGARIS "VESTALE" 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 7540) 

Flower clusters. June 2, 1924. 



Plate CXXIX 




SYRINGA VULGARIS "CHRISTOPHE COLOMB" 

(Arnold Arboretum no. 5117) 

Flower clusters. June 2, 1926. 



Plate CXXX 




SYRINGA VULGARIS "LEMOINEI" 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 1852) 

Flower clusters. May 26, 1924. 



Plate CXXXI 




SYRINGA VULGARIS "DUC DE MASSA" 
(Arnold Arboretum no. 7195) 

Flower clusters. June 2, 1924. 



Plate CXXXII 




< 






Q 






>— i 






h-i 






J 






< 




. 


a, 


M 


ri- 
ot 

o 


hH 


l-l 




1/1 


LO 


••» 


S 


. 




w 


o 




>1 


a 


>, 


h-) 
< 


B 

-i-> 


rt 

s 


s 




. 


1/3 


o 
u 




>— i 


< 


O 


« 


S3 






• p— i 


i-l 


a 


-i-> 


> 


I-l 

< 




< 






O 






K 






HH 






Pi 






tH 






w 







Plate CXXXIII 







m 

S 

o 

o 
o 

w 

n 
& 

o 

H 

o 



o 



i— i 

2 

< 
o 

p 



SO 






l-l 

o 



2 fl 



o 

(-1 



o 

CO 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 

Syringa vulgaris Linnaeus, Sp. PI. i. 9 (1753). — Zinn, Cat. PI. Hort. Gotting. 275 
( I 757)- — Miller, Diet. Gard. ed. 8 (1768). — Duroi, Harbk. Baumz. 11. 443 (1772). — 
Reichard, Fl. Moeno-Francof. 2 (1772). — Murray, Syst. Veg. 55 (1774). — Leers, Fl. 
Herborn. 2 (1775). — Builliard, Introd. Fl. Envir. Paris, t. 4 (1776); Herb. France, t. 
265 (1780). — Moench, Enum. PI. 3 (1777). — Houttuyn, Pflanzensyst. ill. 19 (1778). — 
Leysser, Fl. Halensis, 2 (1783). — Willdenow, Fl. Berol. 7 (1787); Berlin. Baumz. 
378 (1796); Sp. PI. 1. 48 (1797); Enum. PI. Hort. Berol. 14 (1809).— J. P. Buc'hoz, 
Coll. Fl. 1. t. 29 (1776). — Gartner, Fruct. 1. 224 (1788); rv. t. 49, fig. 4 (1807). — Roth, 
Tent. Fl. Germ. 1. 4 (1788); Man. Bot. 1. 8 (1830). — Schrank, Baier. Fl. 1. 206 (1789); 
Fl. Monac. in. t. 233 (1816). — W. Aiton, Hort. Kew. 1. 15 (1789). — Baumgarten, 
Sert. Lips. 45 (1790) ; Fl. Lips. 4 (1790) ; Enum. Stirp. Transsilv. 1. 16 (1816). — Schkuhr, 
Bot. Handb. 1. 8, t. 2 (1791). — Hoffmann, Deutschl. Fl. 3 (1791). — Curtis, Bot. Mag. 
VI. t. 183 (1793). — Schmidt, Oesterr. Baumz. 11. 26, t. 77 (1794) (t. as S. vulgaris purp- 
urea}). — Rohling, Deutschl. Fl. 67 (1796). — Marter, Oestreich. Baume, 122 (1796). — 
Braune, Salzburg. Fl. 1. 7 (1797). — W. Salisbury, Hort. Paddingt. 89 (1797); Cat. 
London Bot. Gard. 1 (1809). — Sturm, Deutschl. Fl., Abth. 1. 2, t. 4 (1798). — [De 
Launay] in Bon Jard. 1805, 584. — Persoon, Syn. PI. 1. 9 (1805). — Vahl, Enum. PI. 1. 38 
(1805). — Mirbel, Hist. Nat. PI. xv. 145, 148, t. ci. (1805-1806). — Gmelin, Fl. Bad. 
Alsat. 1. 13 (1805-1826). — Loiseleur-Deslongchamps, Fl. Gall. 1. 6 (1806); Herb. Gen. 
Amateur, vn. 443, t. (1824); in Ann. Soc. Hort. Paris, xxxviii. 781 (1847). — Schrader, 
Fl. Germ. 1. 10 (1806). — Poiteau and Turpin, Fl. Paris, 7 (1808). — F. G. Dietrich, 
Vollst. Lex. Gartn. Botanik, ix. 591 (1809). — Desfontaines, Hist. Arb. Arbris. 1. 99 
(1809); Cat. PI. Hort. Reg. Paris, ed. 3, 87 (1829). — Schweigger and Korte, Fl. Erlang. 
2 (1811). — Le Turquier Delongchamp, Fl. Envir. Rouen, 1. 4 (1816). — Roemer and 
Schultes, Syst. Veg. 1. 76 (1817); Mantissa, 1. 84 (1822). — Hayne, Dendr. Fl. 2 (1822). — 
Mertens and Koch, Rohling's Deutschl. Fl. 1. 301 (1823). — Thuillier, Fl. Envir. 
Paris, 5 (1824) (reprint of ed. 2, 1799). — Bluff and Fingerhuth, Comp. Fl. Germ. 1. 10 
(1825); ed. 2, 1. 15 (1836). — Sprengel, Syst. Veg. 1. 36 (1825). — A. Richard, Diet. 
Class, ix. 400 (1826); Elemens Hist. Nat. 111. 297 (1838). — Spenner, Fl. Friburg. 1. 
373 (1826). — Sweet, Hort. Brit. 272 (1827). — Prince, Short Treatise Hort. 121 (1828). — 
Nees, PL Offic. 1. t. 214 (1828). — Rochel, PI. Banat. 24 (1828). — Zuccarini, Charakt. 
Deutsch. Holzgew. Blattl. Zustande, 8, t. 5, fig. 1. 1-3 (1829). — Drapiez, Herb. Amateur 
Fleurs, m. 153, t. (1829). — Reichenbach, Fl. Germ. Excurs. 1. 433 (1830-1832); Icones 
Fl. Germ. Helv. xvn. 20, t. 32, mlxxiii. figs. 1-5 (1855). — Blanqui, Voy. Bulg. 115 
(1831). — Flora, xrv. pt. 1. 399 (1831). — A. Dietrich, Sp. PI. 1. 247 (1831). — Loudon, 
Gardener's Mag. rx. 706 (1833); Arb. Brit. 11. 1209, fig. 1036 (1838). — G. Don, Gen. 

Syst. rv. 51 (1838). — Spach, Hist. Nat. Veg. viii. 283 (1839). — D. Dietrich, Syn. PL 

201 



202 THE LILAC 

i. 38 (1839). — Bosse, Vollstand. Handb. Blumengartn. 111. 461 (1842). — Caron in Mel. 
Litt. Sci. 155 (1844). — De Candolle, Prodr. vin. 282 (1844). — Plee, Types, sub. t. 
117 (1844-1864), text in part. — Petermann, Deutschl. Fl. 372, t. 59, fig. 462 (1849). — 
Visiani, Fl. Dalmat. 111. 23 (1852). — C. Morren in Bull. Acad. Roy. Sci. Belg. ser. 1, 
xx. 273-284, t. (opp. p. 284), figs. 1-4 (1853) (reprinted in Clusia, 173-184, t. xm. figs. 
1-4, 1852-1874); in Belg. Hort. rv. 66 (1854). — Heuffel, Enum. PI. Banatu, 158 (1858). — 
Willkomm, Deutschl. Laubh. Winter, 46, fig. 79 (1859); Fuhr. Reich Deutsch. Pflanz. 
445 (1863); Forstl. Fl. 565 (1875). — Decaisne and Naudin, Man. Amateur Jard. ni. 
87 (1862-1866). — Czihak and Szabo in Flora, xlvi. 152 (1863). — Kirchnerin Petzold 
and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 494 (1864). — Ascherson, Fl. Prov. Brandenb. 419 (1864). — 
Jager, Ziergeholze, 530 (1865). — Schur, Enum. PI. Transsilv. 451 (1866). — Lindley 
and Moore, Treasury Bot. 11. 1117 (1866). — Fuss, Fl. Transsilv. 432 (1866). — O. 
Kuntze, Taschen-Fl. Leipzig, 82 (1867). — Pasquale, Cat. Orto Bot. Napoli, 100 (1867). — 
[K. Koch] in Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. xn. 41 (1869) ; Dendr. n. pt. 1. 265 
(1872). — Regel, Russ. Dendr. 206, fig. 49 (1870). — Fant, Sveriges Trad. Buskar Vinter- 
dragt, 46, t. xi. fig. 51 (1872). — Hallier, Deutschl. Fl. t. 299 (1873-1875). — Hartwig 
and Riimpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 558 (1875). — De Vos in Nederl. Fl. Pom. n. 
202 (1876). — De Jaubert, Invent. Cult. Trianon, 25 (1876). — Hemsley, Handb. Hardy 
Trees, 294 (1877). — Lavallee, Arb. Segrez. 168 (1877). — Boissier, Fl. Orient, iv. 38 
(1879). — Decaisne in Nouv. Arch. Mus. Paris, ser. 2, n. 39, t. 1. b., figs. 33-44 (1879). — 
Lauche, Deutsch. Dendr. 169 (1880). — Dietz in Erdesz. Lap. 1882, 221. — Borbas 
in Erdesz. Lap. 1882, 883. — H. Miiller, Fertilisation of Flowers (translated by D'A. W. 
Thompson), 392, fig. 129 (1883). — Baier in Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. xxxiii. 327 (1883). — 
Bosemann, Deutschl. Geholze Winterkl. 66 (1884). — Simonkai, Enum. Fl. Transsilv. 
392 (1886). — Bielz in Verh. Mitt. Siebenburg. Ver. Naturw. Hermannstadt, xxxvi. 51 
(1886). — Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. m. 537 (1887). — Sargent in Garden and Forest, 
1. 220 (1888); in Bull. Arnold Arb. no. 23, May 22 (1912); no. 40, May 9 (1913); no. 51, 
Nov. 7 (1913); n. s. 1. 13 (1915); v. 17 (1919). — Nagy in Gartenflora, xxxvn. 587 
(1888). — Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 112 (1889). — Franchet in Rev. Hort. 1891, 
308; in Garden, xl. 157, 173 (1891). — Velenovsky, Fl. Bulgar. 378 (1891); Suppl. 1. 
190, 332 (1898) ; in Sitzungsb. Bohm. Gesellsch. Wissensch. Prag, Jahrg. 1893, n0 - xxxvn. 
42 (1894). — Hartwig, HI. Geholzb. 379, fig. (1892). — Mouillefert, Traite Arb. Arbris. 
n. 997 (1892-1898). — Koehne, Deutsch. Dendr. 500 (1893). — L. Henry in Jardin, 
vih. 88, 102, 174 (1894); xv. 280 (1901); in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, n. 727, 732 
(1901). — Shirasawa in Bull. Agric. Coll. Tokyo, n. 277, t. xi. fig. 28 (Japan. Laubh. 
Winterzust.) (1895). — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652, t. 91, fig. 364 (1896). — Bean 
in Garden, Lni. 276 (1898); Trees and Shrubs Brit. Isles, 11. 572 (1914). — Rehder in 
Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xrv. 205, fig. (1899); in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 
3301, figs. 3758, 3761, 3762 (1917); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 755 (1927). — E. 
Lemoine in Rev. Hort. 1900, 373 ; in Jour. Hort. Soc. London, xxrv. 299, fig. 112 (1900). — 
Coste, Fl. France, n. 541, fig. (1903). — Schneider in Wien. HI. Gartenz. xxviii. 99 
(1903); Dendr. Winterstudien, 220, fig. 210 n-r, 265 (1903); in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. 
Ges. no. 20, 226, 228 (191 1); HI. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 774, figs. 485 a-c, 486 i-m (191 1); 
in Suva Tarouca, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. 361 (1913). — Lochot in Rev. Hort. 1903, 125, 
figs. 48-50. — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903). — Krause 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 203 

in Sturm, Deutschl. Fl. x. 40, t. 2 (1903). — Ward, Trees; Handb. For. Bot. 1. 14, fig. 
5, 42, 157, fig. 74 (1904). — 0. and B. Fedtschenko in Bull. Herb. Boissier, ser. 2, rv. 
375 (1904). — Wagner, 111. Deutsch. Fl. ed. 3, 552, fig. (1905). — Dunbar in Gard. Mag. 
1. 234 (1905); in Florists Exch., Sept. 22, 1923, 799, 830. — Gardeners' Mag. xlix. 
666 (1906). — Komarov in Act. Hort. Petrop. xxv. 257 (Fl. Mansh. 111.) (1907). — L. 
Fekete and T. Blattny, Verbreit. Baume Straucher Ungarn (transl. from the Hungarian, 
1913), 1. 42, i49> 454, 510, 513, 567, 57i, 621, 749, 754, 825, 835, map v. (1914). — Von 
Hayek, Pflanzend. Osterr.-Ungarns, 1. 350, 442, 444, 445, 451, fig. 261 (opp. p. 448) 
(1914-1915). — Mottet, Arbust. Orn. 246 (1908); Arb. Arbust. Orn. 341 (1925)/ — 
Schelle in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 24, 208 (191 5). — Goeze in Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges. no. 25, 133 (1916). — Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxhi. 153 (1916); Aristocrats of 
the Garden, 213 (1917). — Kronfeld in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 27, 209 (1918). — 
Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 232 (1917). — Trelease, Winter Bot. 313, fig. 1 (1918); 
PL Mat. Woody PI. 130 (1921). — Goverts in Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 29, 289 
(1920). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. i-n. 88, fig. 1 a, b (1920). — 
Silva Tarouca and Schneider, Uns. Freiland-Laubgeh. ed. 2, 404 (1922). — Camus, Arb. 
Arbust. Arbris. p. xcm., p. 82, t. (1923). — Stoi'anoff and Stefanoff, Fl. Bulg. 11. 876 
(1925). — G. Hegi, 111. Fl. Mittel-Eur. v. pt. m. 1912, figs. 2900-2905 (1927). — J. Matt- 
feld in Jour. Arnold Arb. vni. 226, 227 (1927). 

? Syringe lilac Garsault, Fig. PI. Animaux, iv. 336 (as Syringa), t. 574 (as Syringa lilac) 
(1764). 

Syringa caerulea Jonston, Hist. Nat. Arb. 11. 219, t. cxxii. fig. (1768-1769). 

Syringa vulgaris 4. coerulea Weston, Bot. Univ. 1. 289 (1770). — W. Aiton, Hort. Kew. 1. 
15 (1789). — W. T. Aiton, Hort. Kew. ed. 2, 1. 23 (1810). — A. Dietrich, Sp. PL I. 
247 (1831). — G. Don, Gen. Syst. rv. 51 (1838). — Loudon, Arb. Brit. n. 1209 
(1838). — De Candolle, Prodr. viii. 282 (1844). — Kirchner inPetzold and Kirchner, 
Arb. Muscav. 494 (1864), as a form. — Regel, Russ. Dendr. 206 (1870). — Hartwig 
and Riimpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 559 (1875). — Lavallee, Arb. Segrez. 169 
(1877). — Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. 111. 537 (1887). — Mouillefert, Traite Arb. 
Arbris. 11. 998 (1892-1898). — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xrv. 206 
(1899); in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3298 (191 7); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 
756 (1927). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903), as a 
form. — Schneider, 111. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 774 (1911). — Lingelsheim in Engler, 
Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 89 (1920), as a form. 

Lilac vulgaris Lamarck, Fl. Francoise, 11. 305 (1778); Encycl. Meth. in. 512 (1789); 
Tab. Encycl. Meth. 1. 26 (1791). — Moench, Meth. PL 431 (1794). — Ventenat, 
Tabl. Regne Veg. n. 307; iv. t. 8, fig. 6 (1799). — Dumont de Courset, Bot. Cult. 1. 
708 (1802). — Mirbel in Nouv. Duhamel, 11. 206, t. 61 (1804). — Lamarck and De 
Candolle, Fl. Francaise, in. 495 (1805). — Poiteau and Turpin, Fl. Paris. 7, t. v. 
(1808) (t. as Lilac vulgaris, Lilas de Marly). — Jaume Saint-Hilaire, PL France, 
vn. t. 613 (1820). — Lamarck and Poiret, Rec. Planch. Bot. Encycl. 1. t. 7 (1823) 
(t. as Lilac). — Jacques and Herincq, Man. Gen. PL hi. 53 (1847-1857). — Loret 
and Barrandon, Fl. Montpellier, ed. 2, 321 (1886). 

Syringa vulgaris a Leysser, Fl. Halensis, 2 (1783). 

Lilac vulgar e Allioni, FL Pedemont. 1. 83 (1785). 

Syringa Latifolia Salisbury, Prodr. Stirp. 13 (1796). 

Liliacum vulgaris Renault, FL Dept. Orne, 100 (1804). 



204 THE LILAC 

Siringa vulgaris Thiriart, Cat. PI. Arbust. Jard. Bot. Cologne, ser. 3, 1 (1806). — Drapiez, 

Herb. Amat. Fl. in. 153, t. (1829) (t. as Syringa vulgaris). 
Busbeckia Lilac Hecart, Bosquets d'Agrement, 94 (1808). 
Syringa cordifolia Stokes, Bot. Comment. 31 (1830). 
Syringa cordifolia a caerulescens Stokes, Bot. Comment. 31 (1830). 
Lilac sterilis Lavy, Etat Gen. Veg. 12 (1830). 

Lilac vulgaris var. coerulea Jacques and Herincq, Man. Gen. PL hi. 54 (1847-1857). 
Syringa officinalis Linnaeus according to Thompson, Fl. PI. Riviera, 156 (1914). 
Lilac coerulea Lunell in Am. Midland Nat. iv. 506 (19 16). 
Pre-Linnean synonyms: 

Queue de Regnard Belon, Observations, Bk. 111. Chap. l. 208 (1554). 

Lilac Mattioli, Commentarii, i23'6, fig. (1565); 765, fig. (1570); Opera, 854, fig. 1. 

(1598). — Pena and Lobel, Stirp. 414 (1570). — Tournefort, Elemens Bot. 1. 474, in. t. 

372 (1694); Instit. ed. 2, 1. 601 (1700); Hist. PI. n. 81 (1732) (translated by J. 

Martyn). — Magnol, Hort. Reg. Monspel. 117 (1697). — Boerhaave, Index Alter 

PI. pt. 2, 221 (1720). — Vaillant, Bot. Paris, 116 (1727). — P. Miller, Gard. Diet. 

(I73 1 )- 
Syringa caerulea Lusitanica Lobel, PI. Stirp. 540, fig. (1576); PI. Stirp. Icon. 11. 101, 

fig. (1581). — Besler, Hort. Eystett. 1. 1, t. n. (1613) (t. as Syringa flore coeruleo). 
Syringa flore caeruleo Lecluse, Rar. Stirp. Hisp. 126 (1576). — Camerarius, Hort. Med. 

165 (1588). — J. Bauhin and Cherler, Hist. PI. Univ. Bk. vni. 204, fig. (1650). — 

Heucher, Novi Hort. Med. Acad. Vitemberg. 8 (1711). 
Cauda vulpina Lecluse, Rar. Stirp. Hisp. 127 (1576), as a synonym. 
Ligustrum Orientate Cesalpino, De Plantis, Bk. in. Chap, xliii. 120; Bk. rv. Chap. x. 

153 (1583)- 
Jeseminum caeruleum Arabum Cesalpino, De Plantis, Bk. in. Chap, xliii. 120; Bk. iv. 

Chap. x. 153 (1583), as a synonym. 
Littach Dodoens, Stirp. Hist. Pempt. vi. Bk. n. Chap. xvn. 766, fig. (1583); Cruydt- 

boeck, 1310, fig. (1608). 
Syringa caeruleo flore Dalechamps, Hist. Omnium PI. 1. 355, fig. (1587). — Lecluse, Rar. 

PI. Hist. 55, fig. (1601). 
Syringa Lusitanica Tabernaemontanus, Neuw Kreuterbuch, 111. 749, fig. (1588-1591). 
Syringa caerulea Gerard, Herball, Bk. m. 1213, fig. (1597); same, enlarged by T. Johnson, 

Bk. in. 1400, fig. 2 (1636). — G. Bauhin, Pinax, 398 (1623). — Bobart, Cat. Hort. 

Bot. Oxon. 174 (1658). — Joncquet, Hortus, 125 (1659). — R. Morison, Hort. Reg. 

Blesensis, 199 (1669). — Ray, Meth. PI. Nova, 41 (1682); Hist. PI. n. Bk. 31, 1763 

(1686-1704). — Sutherland, Hort. Med. Edinburg. 328 (1683). — Commelin, Cat. 

PI. Hort. Med. Amstelodam. 340 (1689). — Plunkenet, Opera Omnia Bot. rv. 

Almagest. Bot. 359 (1696). — Boerhaave, Index PI. 252 (1710). — Buxbaum, Enum. 

PI. Hallensi, 314 (1721). — Zwinger, Theatr. Bot. 255 (1744). 
KaXoj3orpi>xts [Kalobotrychis] Reneaulme, Spec. Hist. PL 31, fig. (1611). 
Bellegrappe Reneaulme, Spec. Hist. PL 31 (1611), as a synonym. 
Siringa caerulea lusitanica sive lilac Mathioli Morin, Cat. PL (1621). 
Lilac sive Syringa caerulea Parkinson, Paradisi, 407, fig. 4 (1629). 
Foxe taile Parkinson, Paradisi, 410 (1629), as a synonym. 
Lilac Matthioli sive Syringa flore caeruleo Parkinson, Theatr. Bot. 1466, fig. 1 (1640) 

(t. as Syringa flore caeruleo). — P. Miller in Cat. PL 45 (1730). 
Lilach(i) Syringa caerulea Bobart, Cat. PL Hort. Med. Oxon. 30 (1648). 
Syringa coerulea(i) Lilach Bobart, Cat. PL Hort. Med. Oxon. 50 (1648). 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 205 

Syringa Azura J. Bauhin and Cherler, Hist. PL Univ. I. Bk. viii. 204, fig. (1650), as a 

synonym. 
Lillac mathioli Cat. Hort. Reg. Paris, 58 (1660). 
Syringa Arabum flore coeruleo Munting, Waare Oeffening PL 122 (1672); Naauwkeurige 

Beschr. Aardgew. 162 (1696). 
Syringha coerulea Hermann, Hort. Acad. Lugduno-Bat. 586 (1687). 
Sambucus Hispanica Heucher, Novi Prov. Hort. Med. Acad. Vitemberg. 8 (1711), as a 

synonym. 
Lilach Bailey, Diet. Rust. ed. 3 (1726). 

Syringa flore caeruleo Lilac sive Matthioli Bradley, Diet. Bot. (1728). 
Syringa foliis lanceolato-cordatis Linnaeus, Hort. Cliff. 6 (1737). — Roy en, Fl. Leydens. 

397 (1740). — Dalibard, Fl. Paris, 2 (1749). 
Syringa flore caeruleo major Ruppius, FL Jenens. 24 (1745). 
Syringa coerulea sive Lilac Weinmann, Phyt. Icon. iv. 393, t. 959, fig. a (1745); Taalryck 

Reg. Plaat. Fig. (Dutch title page is Duidelyke Vertooning), viii. 454, t. 959, fig. a 

(1748). 
Syringa foliis ovato cordatis Linnaeus, Hort. Upsal. 1. 6 (1748). 
Syringa rubra C. Gesner, Opera Bot. Bk. v. 123, t. xx. fig. CLXxvin. (1753). 

A large shrub or small tree to 25 ft. or rarely taller; trunk and older branches covered 
with gray bark exfoliating in long, narrow strips; branchlets glabrous, occasionally 
glandular-pubescent, sparingly lenticellate, sometimes quadrangular. Winter-buds 
ovoid with acute apex, flower-bud Y% in. long more or less, varying in color from purplish 
brown in colored forms to greenish in white forms, scales lustrous, acute, glabrous, promi- 
nently keeled and forming a markedly four-sided bud. Leaf-scar slightly, or sometimes 
much raised, shield-shaped, inconspicuous, medium size; bundle-trace only slightly 
curved. Leaves ovate or broad-ovate, 1^-5 in. long, "%-^Yi in. broad, acuminate, 
base truncate, subcordate, cordate, or broad-cuneate, dark green, glabrous, sometimes 
glandular-pubescent above, same beneath; petiole z Ar^Yi in. long, stout or sometimes 
slender, glabrous, occasionally glandular-pubescent. Inflorescence broad or narrow- 
pyramidal or conical, lateral, upright, 4-8 in. long, rhachis glabrous, occasionally glandular- 
pubescent, sparingly lenticellate; pedicel J^ in. long more or less, glabrous, occasion- 
ally glandular-pubescent; calyx glabrous, occasionally glandular-pubescent, with short, 
acuminate or acute teeth; corolla- tube slender, cylindric, l / 3 - 7 /16 in. long; corolla- 
lobes spreading at right angles to corolla-tube, frequently curling backward, broad or 
narrow, rounded or pointed at apex, usually cucullate; corolla J^ in. in diameter more 
or less; color of type probably close to that noted for the form Coerulea superba (see 
Coerulea superba); anthers Deep Colonial Buff (xxx.), inserted just below throat, occa- 
sionally protruding. Capsule oblong or obovoid-oblong, abruptly contracted near apex, 
smooth, acute or acuminate, YtY% in. long. 

Habitat: Southeastern Europe, chiefly in the mountainous regions: Rumania; 
Jugo-Slavia; Bulgaria; Greece. 

In an account of his travels, — "Les observations de plusieurs singularitez & 
choses memorables, trouvees, en Grece, Asie, Judee, Egypte, Arable, & autres pays 
estranges . . .", — published in 1554, Pierre Belon, the French naturalist, writes 
entertainingly of the love of flowers evidenced by the Turks: "II n'y a gents qui 



206 THE LILAC 

se delectent de porter de belles fleurettes, ne qui les prisent plus que font les Turcs : 
car quand ils trouvent quelque belle girofnee, ou autre elegante fleurette, encores 
qu'elle soit sans odeur, neantmoins elle ne perdra pas son pris. Nous aymons les 
bouquets de plusieurs fleurs & petites herbettes odoriferentes meslees ensemble: 
mais les Turcs ne se soucient que de la veue, & ne veulent porter qu'une fleur a, 
la fois: & encore qu'ils en peussent avoir de plusieurs sortes, toutesfois suivant le 
commun usage, ils en portent plusieurs seule a seule dedens le reply de leurs turbans. 
Les artisans ont communement plusieurs fleurs de diverses couleurs devant eux 
dedens quelque vaisseau plein d'eau, pour les tenir fraichement en leur beaute\ 
Parquoy les Turcs ont les jardinages en aussi grande recommandation que nous 
& font grand' diligence de recouvrer des arbres etrangers, & surtout qui portent 
belles fleurs, et n'y pleignent l'argent. . . ." Belon mentions some of their favorite 
flowers and among them a plant which was first identified by Lecluse in 1576 as 
the Lilac: "Les belles fleurs y sont tenues rares, a. l'exemple dequoy nous avons 
veu un petit arbrisseau qui porte les feuilles de Lierre, qui est verd en tous temps, 
& fait sa fleur presque d'une coudee de long, de couleur violette, entournant le 
rameau, gros comme une queue de Regnard : dont est venu que les Turcs le nommant 
en leur langage, l'appelent queue de Regnard." 

As is noted by later writers in discussing Belon's plant the Lilac is not ever- 
green or "verd en tous temps." From the text it appears possible that Belon merely 
referred to the Ivy as evergreen; in general shape the foliage of the two plants is 
somewhat similar and the remainder of the description is clearly applicable to the 
Lilac. The curious old Turkish name persisted as one of the vernacular names 
for the plant. Lecluse in 1576 translated it into the Latin Cauda vulpina, Parkinson 
in 1629 into the English Foxe taile, and Houttuyn in 1778 notes that in German it 
is called Fuchsschwanz. 

Parkinson in his "Paridisi in Sole" in 1629 suggests how any uncertainty as to 
Belon's plant may be removed : "It seemeth likely, that Petrus Bellonius . . . (mak- 
ing mention of a shrubbe that the Turks have, with Ivie leaves alwaies greene, 
bearing blew or violet coloured flowers on a long stalke, of the bignesse and fashion 
of a Foxe taile, and thereupon called in their language a Foxe taile) doth under- 
stand this plant here expressed. The certainty whereof might easily be knowne, 
if any of our Merchants there residing, would but call for such a shrubbe, by the 
name of a Foxe taile in the Turkish tongue, and take care to send a young roote, 
in a small tubbe or basket with earth by sea, unto us here at London, which would 
be performed with very little paines and cost." There is no record that anyone 
followed Parkinson's suggestion. 

It was from Constantinople, the capital of the Turkish empire, that the Com- 
mon Lilac (Syringa vulgaris Linnaeus) was introduced into Europe. The Italian 
botanist, Pietro Andrea Mattioli, in the fifth edition of his "Commentarii," pub- 
lished in 1565, gives the first picture of this plant which he calls Lilac. He states 
that Augerius de Busbeke brought the plant, of which he, Mattioli, gives the 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 207 

picture, with him from Constantinople. The living plant Mattioli had not seen 
except very well and very diligently pictured: "Hanc autem plantam, cuius hie 
imaginem damus, Constantinopoli secum attulit Clarissimus vir Augerius de 
Busbeke, qui continuis septem annis Caesaris Ferdinandi primi apud Solimanum 
Turcarum Imperatorem, oratorem egit. . . . Vivam plantam videre non licuit, sed 
affabre, & diligentissime pictam." Mattioli does not state who painted the original 
picture which he saw, or from whence it came. Augier [Ghislen] de Busbecq, 
also called Bousbecq or Boesbec, was a Flemish scholar and traveler who was born 
at Commines in 1522 and was sent by the Emperor Ferdinand I. as ambassador 
to Solyman II., Sultan of Turkey. Franchet (Rev. Hort. 1891, 1. c.) states that 
Busbecq lived in Constantinople in 1555 and from 1556 to 1563. It was therefore 
not later than 1563 that the Common Lilac was first introduced into Europe. It 
is probable that Busbecq took it first to Vienna, then possibly to Flanders. Franchet 
thinks it was taken first to Italy and then perhaps to Bohemia. 

Kronfeld (Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges., 1. c.) in 1918 writes of the house in 
Vienna where Charles de Lecluse lived from 1573 to 1588 with Dr. Johann Aichholz 
and where in the garden grew many foreign plants; Kronfeld believes that the 
Lilac was already grown there. I translate from Kronf eld's article: ". . . the man 
who really brought the Lilac to Vienna at that time was . . . Augerius Ghislain 
von Busbecq. As envoy from Ferdinand I. he had brought about in 1555 an eight- 
year truce with Sultan Soliman II., and had remained from 155 6- 1562 as ambas- 
sador in Constantinople. . . . After he returned to Vienna, Busbecq took pains to 
grow Oriental plants, among them especially the Lilac, in his garden which sur- 
rounded his house on the Bastei. ... In the garden of the . . . diplomat the 
Lilac bloomed for the first time, highly admired by the Viennese who stood around 
the garden at the corner of the Himmelpfortgasse and the Seilerstatte. To Busbecq 
we also owe its introduction into Flanders." In a note Kronfeld tells us: "When 
in the year 1570 the Archduchess Elisabeth left Austria to set out for France for 
her marriage to Charles IX., Busbecq went along. He was a witness of the 
terrible St. Bartholomew's night from the 23rd to the 24th of August, 1572. . . . 
Elisabeth returned in 1574 to Austria but Busbecq remained in Paris as ambassador 
of the king until his death in 1592." Kronfeld continues: "The Turkish word 
Lilac did not suit the Viennese, so they put in its place the name Turkischer Holler 
and Busbecq's house soon was known as 'Zur Hollerstauden.' . . . There is also 
on the Viennese Molkerbastei, back from the Teinfaltstrasse a small, antique 
house (no. 75), which bore the sign 'Zur Hollerstauden' and which in 1866 was 
able to celebrate its 300th anniversary. Here lived Busbecq, curator of the 
Imperial Court Library." 

W. L. Goverts (Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 29, 289, 1920) notes of S. 
vulgaris: "1557 durch den bekannten Quekelbeen weiter verbreitet"; Dr. Gustav 
Hegi in 1927 states also that after 1557 the chief distribution of the Common 
Lilac was due to Quekelbeen. Writing of the Horsechestnut E. H. Wilson (Romance 



2(08 THE LILAC 

of our Trees, 120, 1920) mentions that "a Flemish doctor, one Quakleben, who 
was attached to the embassy of Archduke Ferdinand I. at Constantinople, in 
1557 first mentioned the tree in a letter to Mattioli as told in the letters, 'Episto- 
larum medicinalium libri quinque' published in Prague in 1561." These letters 
appear in Mattioli's "Opera quae extant [sic] omnia; hoc est, Commentarii in 
VI libros Pedacii Dioscoridis de medica materia . . ." published in 1598 (bk. hi. 
100, 1598), the name appearing as Gulielmus Quacelbenus. The Horsechestnut 
is mentioned here but I have found no reference to the Lilac. I do not know the 
source of Goverts' and Hegi's statements. 

In 1565 Mattioli had not seen the living plant. He confused it with the Glans 
unguentaria or Ben, — now identified as an Indian tree, Moringa oleifera Lamarck, 
called in the vernacular the Horse-radish tree. Despite Mattioli's assurance that 
his picture is faithfully reproduced the original must have been to some extent 
imaginative for the same flower cluster bears both open flowers and well-developed 
fruit. In his "Opera," published in 1598, Mattioli gives a new figure which is supe- 
rior to his first. By this time he had seen the living plant, for in the seventh edition 
of his "Commentarii" he states that Giacomo Antonio Cortusi, head of the botanic 
garden at Padua, had sent him from that city in 1570 both flowering and fruiting 
branches. Cortusi supplied the information that he believed the plant to be the 
Ostryx, mentioned by Theophrastus, — now known to be the Ostrya or Hop- 
Hornbeam, — that he had received it from Africa where it grew in great abundance 
and was called Seringa [sic], and that he had several plants growing in his garden 
where they were cultivated because of their fragrance. The Philadelphus, with 
common name of Syringa, is said to have been named for the Egyptian king 
Ptolemy Philadelphus (see A. H. Moore in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. ed. 3, v. 
2579, 1919); Rehder (Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 270 (1927) however notes: 
"Ancient name of unknown application." It is possible that the two genera were 
here confused, for in Mattioli's time the Philadelphus as well as the Lilac was 
placed in the genus Syringa and Cortusi's Seringa [sic] may well have been a mis- 
spelling or a corruption. It is certain however that neither the Philadelphus nor 
the Lilac is native to Africa. The name Lilac, first used by Mattioli, was retained 
by some writers as the generic name of Syringa vulgaris till about the middle of 
the last century but since then has been quite generally abandoned. The name 
still persists in various common names such as the English Lilac, the French Lilas, 
the Spanish Lila, and so on. 

Mr. Rehder (Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 751, 1927) writes of the derivation 
of the name Syringa: "Probably from the Greek Syrinx, pipe, in reference to the 
stems of the Philadelphus to which the name originally had been applied, until 
Dodoens transferred it to this genus." I have been unable to find that Dodoens 
used the name Syringa except for the Philadelphus. In 1583 he cites Lillach as 
the generic name while Syringa was used as early as 1576 by both Lobel and 
Lecluse. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 209 

Mathieu Lobel, a French botanist, in 1576 writes of the Lilac as Syringa 
caerulea Lusitanica and gives a picture of the plant, much like that of Mattioli, 
but with the addition of a root system. It is possible that the supposed habitat 
of the Lilac in Spain, evidenced by the botanical names Syringa caerulea Lusitanica 
Lobel and Syringa Lusitanica Tabernaemontanus, as well as the vernacular names 
of Spanischer Syringsbaum, first cited by the Alsatian Tabernaemontanus, and 
Spanischer Hollunder, very frequently applied, had its origin here, — Lusitania 
being that part of ancient Spain which is now Portugal. Baumgarten in 1790 
mentions Spain as one of the countries to which the Lilac is indigenous, but it 
was undoubtedly merely naturalized there. 

In 1583 the Italian, Andrea Cesalpino, described the Lilac as Ligustrum 
Orientate and identified it with the Jeseminum caeruleum of the Arabians. He 
writes (De Plantis, Bk. 111. Chap, xliii. 120, 1583): "Frutex quidam peregrinus, 
vocatur Ligustrum Orientate a quibusdam, magnitudine Ligustri: foliis Apocyni 
[Apocynum is the Greek for Dog-bane, now called Dog-bane or Indian Hemp] 
tenuioribus & minus candidis: racemos fert Ligustro grandiores, in quibus flores 
sunt, figura Gelsimini minores caerulei, modico rubore aspersi, & si conuertas 
candor quidam argenteus spectatur, iucundi odoris: siliquas fert breves similiter 
duplices, in quibus semina oblonga, sed sine lanugine, forte merit Jeseminum 
caeruleum Arabum." This Jeseminum caeruleum Arabum appears to have been, 
and still is, a doubtful plant. Tabernaemontanus (Eicones PL Pt. 2, Sect. xn. 
855, fig., 1590; Neuw Kreuterbuch, Pt. 2, Chap. xiv. 538, fig., 1591) gives 
under this name two pictures, both the same, which are evidently of a Jasmine 
and not of a Lilac. Gerard (Herball, 746, fig., 1597) gives the same figure. 
G. Bauhin (Pinax, 398, 1623) calls it Jasminum, caeruleum Serapioni and cites 
Tabernaemontanus' plant, thus: "In hoc genere caeruleum nondum vidimus: an 
Arabes Ligustrum Orientate, quod alias Syringa caerulea dicitur intellexerint, 
Cesalpinus dubitat: alii Clematidem caeruleam esse volunt." I have not seen the 
reference in Serapion. Parkinson (Theatr. Bot. 1468, fig. 3, 1640) writing of the 
cut-leaved Persian Lilac which he calls Syringa Persica sive Lilac Persicum incisis 
foliis Jasminum Persicum dictum, notes: "Yet as I have said before, this is most 
likely to be Serapio his blew Jasmine. . . . This assuredly is the Jasminum caeru- 
leum of Serapio, whereof formerly there was great doubt among Herbarists whether 
there was such a thing in rerum natura, very many denying it, because they either 
never saw this or never considered it." (See S. persica var. laciniata.) 

The Syringa Arabum flare coeruleo of Munting (1672 and 1696) is a Lilac al- 
though two of the plants which he classifies as Syringa are evidently the Philadel- 
phus. He calls it by the common name of Syringa van de Arabiers met een 
blauwe welriekende Bloem. 

Bauhin and Cherler state that at Bologna the Common Lilac, which they call 
Syringa flore caeruleo, is called Syringa Azura: "Bononiae nobis Syringa Azura 
vocata fuit." Zwinger in 1744 gives among foreign common names "Italianisch, 



210 THE LILAC 

Azura" and Weinmann in 1748 notes that the Lilac, Syringa, is named "In't 
Italians, Azura" In the former case the word is used as a specific, and in the 
two latter cases as a generic name. 

Paul de Reneaulme, a French botanist, called the Common Lilac by the Greek 
name Kalobotrychis, meaning a beautiful raceme, and his book, published in 161 1, 
contains an excellent picture of the flowers. 

J. H. Heucher (Novi Prov. Hort. Med. Acad. Vitemberg. 8, 1711) mentions 
Sambucus Hispanica as a synonym which is wrongly applied to the Common Lilac 
which he calls Syringa fl. coeruleo et fl. lacteo, — including in the name both the 
type and its white variety. • 

After 1753 the name Syringa vulgaris was very generally adopted although 
Duhamel de Monceau (Traite Arb. Arbust. 1. 361, t. 138, 1755) in 1755 still 
calls it Lilac Math[ioli] with common name of Lilas des bois a fleur d'un bleu 
pale. 

The "Index Kewensis" (Suppl. rv. 231) cites Garsault's Syringa lilac as a syn- 
onym of S. persica. They refer to the bulletin of the "Herbier Boissier" (ser. 2, 
vni. 906, 1908) where in his "Nomenclator Garsaultianus" A. Thellung gives the 
name, with a question however, as a synonym of S. persica. The figure in Garsault's 
book is rather difficult to classify; the foliage does not resemble that of S. vulgaris 
and the flowers and cluster do not resemble those of S. persica. To me it seems 
more like a poor figure of the Common Lilac than of the Persian. Garsault uses 
the name Syringa lilac on his plate but the heading of his text is Syringa, Lilas. 
The text evidently refers to S. vulgaris. 

Neither Richard Weston nor William Alton who first mention Syringa vulgaris 
var. coerulea refer it to any previous authority, although both give the color as 
blue, the former calling it Blue Lilac, the latter Common Blue Lilac. W. T. Alton, 
in the second edition of the "Hortus Kewensis," of 1810, refers his plant to that 
of Schkuhr (Bot. Handb. 1. 8, t. 2, 1791) where it appears only as Syringa vulgaris, 
both in text and illustration. The flowers shown in the plate are undoubtedly 
of a vivid, and unnatural, blue color. A. Dietrich cites no previous authority for 
his S. vulgaris var. coerulea; it is by G. Don and Loudon that this variety is identi- 
fied beyond a doubt with the type S. vulgaris Linnaeus for both refer it to the 
Syringa flore caeruleo of Lecluse (Rar. PI. Hist. 55, fig. 1601), to the Syringa 
caerulea of Gerard's "Herball" of 1636, to the Syringa caerulea Lusitanica of 
Besler's "Hortus Eystettensis" and to the Lilac sive Syringa caerulea of Parkinson's 
"Paradisi in Sole." 

Other writers such as Lamarck still retain the generic name of Lilac, while 
Renault adopts the new Liliacum frequently erroneously quoted as Lilacum. 
Hecart (Bosquets d'Agrement, 94, 1808) considered that the plant should have been 
named for its introducer: "Le lilas (Busbeckia Lilac nobis) . . . J'ai cru pouvoir 
lui dormer le nom de Busbeckia. Combien cette honneur n'a-t-il 6te prodiguS a 
des gens qui le meritaient beaucoup moins." 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 211 

Jean Lavy (Etat Gen. Veg. 12, 1830) writes of his Lilac sterilis or Lilas sterile: 
"Fleurs- nulles [hence sterile] ; feuilles en cceur, tres-entieres, opposees, petiolees, 
fortes, persistantes, lisses. ..." He is writing of the flora of Piedmont and says 
that the plant "Habite les haies, les lieux ombrages pres de Civas." While this is 
generally considered to be another name for the Persian Lilac it appears evident 
from the heart-shaped leaves that Lavy was writing of the Common Lilac; while 
the foliage is not of course persistent it may have appeared so in that locality. 
Stokes' specific name cordifolia explains itself. It seems probable that Thompson's 
name Syringa officinalis L. (Fl. PL Riviera, 156, 1914) was merely a slip. 

When Charles de Lecluse, a French botanist, published in 1601 his history of 
the rarer plants, the Lilac was evidently well established in European gardens: 
"Hunc etiam alunt nostratium horti, atque plerique Germaniae & aliarum pro- 
vinciarum." 

According to Franchet (Rev. Hort. 1891, 30) it was cultivated in the neighbor- 
hood of Paris in 1601. He cites as evidence Robin's catalogue (1601, 37) which 
I have not seen. It appears in Morin's catalogue for 162 1 as Siringa caerulea 
lusitanica sive lilac Mathioli. 

From gardens it escaped into the hedge-rows, and because of its remarkable 
ability to naturalize itself, soon came to be regarded by botanists as indigenous to 
various countries of western Europe. Carlo Allioni, an Italian, stated in 1785 
that it grew wild in Piedmont, in northern Italy: "Copiose in sylvestribus montis 
Crea nascitur, atque etiam in collibus Taurinensibus. CI. Bellardi sponte pro- 
veniens observavit secus viam, quae ab Eporedia ducit ad vallem Augustae Prae- 
toriae." This statement is refuted by various later writers, among them Christ 
(Garden and Forest, rv. 191, 1891). Albert von Haller, a Swiss botanist, in his 
flora of Switzerland (Hist. Stirp. Helvet. 1. 230, 1768) writes: "Persicae esse originis 
ex inventoribus credas. Nunc nobiscum ita consuevit, ut non in sepibus solis, sed 
in aspera sylva montosa propre Moutru ultra templum earn invenerim. En Cham- 
blande secundum rivum." In 1768 he still called the Lilac Syringa foliis ovato 
cordatis following Linnaeus (Hort. Upsal. 1. 6, 1748). That it was also considered 
to be indigenous to Spain has already been stated. In 1927 Dr. Gustav Hegi in his 
"Illustrierte Flora von Mittel-Europa" cites many localities where the Common 
Lilac is escaped and naturalized in central Europe. 

Schmidt in 1794 attributed it, and possibly all other Lilacs, to China: "China 
scheint das urspriingliche Vaterland dieses, und vielleicht aller Flieder zu seyn; 
denn oft bemerkt man die unverkennbaren Abbildungen derselben auf chinesischen 
beblumten Papieren, Seidenfloren und Stoffen, auf denen sie mit dem Hibiscus 
Rosa Chinensis, der Gardenia, dem orientalischen Mohn, und der Thranenweide 
immer wieder erscheinen." Baker and S. Moore (Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xvn. 
384, 1879) (Contrib. FL North. China) collected at Chienshan in northern China 
a fruiting specimen which they identified as Syringa vulgaris. Of this specimen 
Hemsley (Jour. Linn. Soc. London, xxvi. S^, 1889) writes: "The Chinese specimen 



212 THE LILAC 

is recorded as this species without doubt; but we regard it as insufficient for satis- 
factory determination." Debeaux (Florula de Shang-hai, 42, 1879) mentions the 
Common Lilac as cultivated in the gardens of Shanghai. Probably all these refer- 
ences to S. vulgaris as occurring in China apply to S. oblata. 

Linnaeus in 1748 gives its habitat as the Orient and at about this time it came 
to be commonly regarded as native to Persia, although there is no proof that it 
ever grew there as a wild plant. Albert von Haller, in the reference already cited, 
in 1768 writes: "Persicae esse originis." The belief presumably arose because of 
the fact that it was introduced by way of Constantinople, a city through which the 
products of the East frequently found their way into Europe. Possibly the intro- 
duction in the early part of the seventeenth century of the other Lilac attributed 
erroneously to Persia, S. persica, may have had some contributing influence upon 
the idea (see S. persica). In 1887 Nicholson still named Persia among those coun- 
tries to which the Common Lilac is native, as did Mottet (Arbust. Orn. 246, 1908) 
less than twenty years ago. 

The first mention of its real home appeared in Anton Rochel's work on the 
rarer plants of Banat, — a district of western Rumania bordering on Hungary 
and Jugo-Slavia, — published in 1828: "Syringa vulgaris L. in iisdem locis sat fre- 
quens, attamen nullibi copiosior ac in montis Alibek rupestribus crescit." In 
1831 Heuffel is quoted (Flora, xiv. pt. 1, 399, 1831) as stating that it grew in the 
inaccessible limestone rocks of the valley of Czerna, Mt. Domaglett, and all the 
rocks along the Danube, at the military boundaries of Moldavia, Szaszka, 
Csiklova and Krassova. This statement is repeated by Heuffel in his enumeration 
of the plants of Banat published in 1853: "In rupestribus calcareis ad Reschitza, 
Krassova, Csiklova, Szaszka, in toto Danubii tractu usque ad Thermas Herculis 
vulgatissime et vere indigena." The Baths of Hercules here referred to are said by 
K. Koch (Dendr. 11. pt. 1. 265, 1872) to be near the city of Mehadia. He had seen the 
plant growing there and considered it to be spontaneous. He writes that as far 
as he knows no one has ever found it growing wild in the Orient. Boissier in his 
"Flora Orientalis" (rv. 38, 1879) is doubtful of the spontaneity of the only speci- 
men which he cites from the east: "Habitat in sylvaticis rupestribus Bithynia circa 
Brussan (Thirke!) An vere spontanea?" He gives its geographical distribution as 
"Hungaria, Transylvania, Serbia." 

Blanqui in an account of his travels in Bulgaria in the year 1841 (Voy. Bulg. 
115, 1843) writes: "La vallee de l'lpek est une des plus delicieuses contrees de la 
Servie et peut-etre de tout l'Orient. Bordee sur ses deux rives par des collines 
fertiles et fraiches au cceur de l'ete comme un vallon Suisse . . . elle ressemble a 
une veritable oasis. . . . C est la que j'ai vu pour la premiere fois une foret de 
lilas gigantesques de la hauteur de nos futaies. . . ." 

Despite the testimony to the contrary which was then, in 1891, available, 
Franchet (Rev. Hort. 1891, 309) was still of the opinion that the plant might have 
become naturalized in these regions as well as in western Europe. Edouard Andre, 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 213 

in a paragraph added to Franchet's article, disagrees with this writer and says that 
he saw it growing wild and abundantly in the mountains separating Bulgaria from 
Serbia. He says that it was most common on the steep and rocky cliffs bordering 
the narrow defiles of Nischava near Nisch where it was mingled with Staphylea 
pinnata, Coronilla Emerus and other spring-flowering shrubs, and with the pretty 
flowers of Lunaria annua and Adonis vernalis* 

In the Arnold Arboretum are specimens collected in 1907 by C. K. Schneider, 
as follows: no. 1491, 2 specimens of fruit and of foliage from Sliven (Slivno), 
Bulgaria, August 3; no. 574, 2 specimens, from near Slivno, July 20; no. 10, of 
undeveloped flowers, from Herkulesbad in the valley of Kazan, Hungary (now 
Rumania), April 28; no. 112, of flowers, from Nish, Servia (now a part of Jugo- 
slavia), May 12; no. 1489, of fruit, from near Nish, September 7; no. 1660, of 
fruit, from near Herkulesbad, Mt. Domaglett, Hungary (now Rumania), September; 
no. 368, 2 specimens, from near Varna, Bulgaria, June 2. Also in the same her- 
barium are the following specimens: no. 1659, of flowers, collected for Schneider 
by Golopencza, from near Herkulesbad, Mt. Domaglett, Hungary (now Rumania), 
June 5, 1907; one of flowers, from Banat, Rumania, collected by Wetschky, May, 
1890; one of flowers, from Dobruja, a district now in Rumania and bordering on 
the Black Sea, collected by Sintenis, May 22, 1875; another, collector not given, 
of flowers and fruit, from the valley of the Isker near Sofia, Bulgaria, June, 1906. 
Joh. Mattfeld in "A Botanical Journey in Greece in the summer of 1926" 
(Jour. Arnold Arb., 1. c.) writes of his journey by train from Drama to Kometini 
(Gumuldshina) [this is in northern Greece, not far from the line separating Mace- 
donia and Thrace] : "The ride on this railroad is much more interesting . . . since 
it crosses one part of the southern Rhodope Mountains. . . . The railroad climbs 
gradually higher and at an altitude of about 250 m. the hills are closer together and 
the railroad enters the valley of the Doksat tshaj. ... At 322 m. altitude the 
watershed is reached and we go down to the Mesta in whose valley the most attrac- 
tive part of the train ride lies. All the slopes are covered with sibljak vegetation in 
which the just mentioned species [Carpinus duinensis and Paliurus aculeatus] play 
the major part. Not infrequently occur also Quercus lanuginosa, Q. conferta, 
Q. cerris, Fraxinus Ornus, Ligustrum vulgare, Cornus, Syringa vulgaris, Juniperus 
(apparently /. communis and /. Oxycedrus), Ulmus campestris, Prunus spinosa, 
Pyrus amygdaliformis. . . . We enter now the eight to ten kilometers long gorge 
of the Mesta river. The slopes drop to the river at a very steep angle and therefore 
are difficult of access. ... A dense, though probably for edaphic reasons, rather 
low wood extends over all the slopes. The trees have partly low trunks, but also 
shrubby growth is very common. A great number of various elements seem to be 

* Further sources of information in regard to the occurrence of S. vulgaris in southeastern Europe may 
be found in the following works: Fuss (Fl. Transsilv. 1866); Simonkai (Enum. Fl. Transsilv. 1866); Vele- 
novsky (Fl. Bulgar. 1891; Suppl., 1898); Stolanoff and Stefanoff (Fl. Bulgar. n. 1925); Von Hayek (Pflanzend. 
Osterr.-Ungarns, I. 1914-1915); Engler and Drude (Veg. Erde, 11. 1898; in. 1899; rv. 1901; x. 1908; xi. 1909); 
Lingelsheim (Engler, Pflanzenr., 1920). 



214 THE LILAC 

represented in this wood and the whole formation gives the impression of being 
a mixture of maquis, sibljak, and evergreen and deciduous high forest. From the 
train we noted the following woody plants: Quercus coccifera, Q. lanuginosa, 
Phillyrea media, Oka europaea (wild form), Pistacia Terebinthus . . . Ficus Carica 
(mostly shrubby), Erica arbor ea, E. verticillata, Juniperus Oxycedrus, Cercis Sili- 
quastrum, Cistus cf. creticus, Syringa vulgaris, Fraxinus Ornus, Rosa sp., Coronilla 
emeroides, Paliurus aculeatus, Rubus, Ephedra campylopoda, Clematis, Vitis sylves- 
tris and doubtfully Celtis and Arbutus." Lingelsheim cites two specimens from 
the Olympus, a mountain range on the borders of Thessaly and Macedonia; they 
were collected by Noe (no. 2 a) and by Dorfler (no. 244). Schneider also names 
Macedonia as one of the localities where the plant was found, as does Hegi. 

The specimen of S. vulgaris, which is recorded by Olga and Boris Fedtschenko 
in their "Matenaux pour la Flore de la Crimee" (Bull. Herb. Boissier, 1. c.) as 
found on the southern shore (cote) of the Crimea in a wood in the valley of Laspi 
(June 28), they mention as "quasi sponte," or, as if it were wild. It is possible 
that from Rumania the Lilac may extend along into the Ukraine in southern Russia. 

Schneider also mentions Bithynia, an ancient country in the northwest of Asia 
Minor, bounded by the Black Sea on the north and by the Sea of Marmora on the 
west. He cites no specimen (111. Handb. Laubholzk., 1. c). Dr. Hegi merely lists 
it among the plant's habitats according to Schneider. This locality, as already 
noted, was mentioned in 1879 by Boissier but he was doubtful of the spontaneity 
of the plant which he saw. 

S. vulgaris is found in Rumania, in Jugo-Slavia according to Hegi who mentions 
it as coming from Herzegovina, a district forming the southern part of Bosnia, and 
not far removed therefore from the Adriatic Sea, in Bulgaria and in Greece. The 
plant is especially common apparently in the Transylvanian Alps and in the 
Balkan Mountains; according to Mattfeld it is found not infrequently in the southern 
Rhodope Mountains of northern Greece. It occurs slightly further north than 
Brad in Rumania, and as far west as Herzegovina in Jugo-Slavia. Its most south- 
erly point, so far as the records indicate, is in the Olympus Mountains of northern 
Greece. It is found as far east as Dobruja in Rumania. Despite the fact that it is 
noted, even in such a recent work as that of StoianofI and Stefanoff, as coming from 
Asia Minor, the Caucasus and Persia, yet they cite no records and I do not know 
of any well authenticated wild specimen having been found east of the Bosporus. 
Nor do I know of any specimen from what is now Hungary. 

G. Hegi (1. c.) gives an interesting phytogeographical account of S. vulgaris 
which in translation reads: "S. vulgaris belongs to the Dacian element as for in- 
stance Euphorbia Carniolica, Helleborus purpurascens and so on, and is found, in the 
southwestern part of Transylvania and in Banat, preferring the Dacian oak forests 
which are rich in species, as undergrowth to Quercus Robur, Q. sessilifiora, Q. Cerris, 
Q. pubescens and Q. conferta, Tilia tomentosa, Acer Tataricum, Fraxinus Ornus, 
Carpinus Orientalis, Corylus Colurna, and Juglans regia, and with an under- 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 215 

growth of Ruscus aculeatus and R. Hypoglossum, Trifolium Molineri and T. 
expansum, Digitalis lanata, Acanthus Hungaricus and so on. In the valley of 
Schyl it forms on limestone slopes luxuriantly flowering shrubs together with 
Fraxinus Ornus and Evonymus latifolia. In the most extreme southwestern part of 
the Carpathians, as in the Czerna Valley near Mehadia and Herculesbad, it occurs 
as undergrowth on more open places in the very old beech forests, in company with 
Fraxinus Ornus, Crataegus melanocarpa and Cotinus Coggygria. In central Europe 
it is in some places completely naturalized and not only occurs in hedges and 
shrubberies of the sorts made by Roses and Barberries, but also on completely 
inaccessible rocks as on the Alb near Werenwag, Trochtelfingen, Blaubeuren and 
Ulm, where it grows however less luxuriantly than in gardens but it fruits profusely 
each year. Gradmann believed, (apparently wrongly) judging from these condi- 
tions, that the Syringa is not native in the Carpathian Mountains. The naturaliza- 
tion in certain countries of central Europe was especially helped by the fact that 
it was customary on many places instead of using stone walls to have gardens and 
property surrounded by hedges; for these, in addition to varieties of Crataegus, 
Berberis vulgaris, Lycium halimifolium, Sambucus nigra, Ligustrum vulgare, Prunus 
spinosa, Prunus Mahaleb, Carpinus Betulus and so on, the Lilac was also used on 
account of its spreading habit." 

One of the best descriptions of the Common Lilac in its native surroundings 
was written by J. Lochot (Rev. Hort. 1903, 125, figs. 48-50); he was in charge of 
the gardens of the Prince of Bulgaria and during the time he held that post was 
able to acquire considerable information in regard to the Lilac and to visit some of 
the localities where it grew. He states that if there is any doubt as to its being 
native to the Balkans one has but to visit the principal towns of that region in the 
springtime, and see the quantity of uprooted young plants and cut-flowers brought 
in for sale by the peasants, to be convinced of its abundance. His account of the 
Lilac growing in the Balkan Mountains is sufficiently interesting to be quoted at 
some length: "Si Ton parcourt le pays au travers de la grande chaine des Balkans, 
ou sur les nombreux contreforts qui s'en detachent, il est peu de montagnes sur 
lesquelles on ne rencontre quelques stations de Lilas, parfois peu importantes, 
d'autres fois d'une etendue de plusieurs kilometres. Nous avons visite deux de 
ces stations; une assez restreinte, dans le defile de la riviere Isker, a peu de distance 
de Sophia; l'autre dans le voisinage des grands Balkans, pres de la route qui conduit 
de Stara-Tagora a Kasanlik, la ville a Fessence de Rose. Cette derniere station 
s'6tendait sur plusieurs kilometres, et il nous a ete signale d'autres encore plus 
importantes. . . . Le Lilas croit a une altitude de 7 a 800 metres. Dans les deux 
stations ou nous l'avons rencontre il se trouvait garnrr des pentes exposees au sud 
et a Test; il n'en existait pas un seul pied aux expositions de nord et de l'ouest. 
Dans le defile de l'lsker, la station se trouvait en bordure d'un bois touflu et s'etan- 
dant jusqu'au bord des eaux. Des rochers abrupts en etaient garnis, et nous 
n'avons pas ete surpris de voir le Lilas croitre dans les fentes de rochers qui rece- 



216 THE LILAC 

laient a peine quelques parcelles de terre. A la lisiere du bois on rencontrait encores 
quelques pieds, puis en penetrant a, l'interieure, pas un seul. Ces observations 
nous amenent a, conclure que le Lilas commun est bien un arbrisseau de plein 
soleil; qu'il ne redoute pas les sols sees, arides, et peut tres bien etre employe" comme 
plante de rocailles. L'exposition du nord lui est defavorable, car s'il croit volon- 
tiers, sa floraison laisse toujours a, desirer. Dans la deuxieme station, les obser- 
vations que nous avons faites sont venues confirmer celles qui viennent d'etre 
indiquees: la plante recouvrait, sur une vaste etendue, une pente seche exposee au 
sud. Elle s'y trouvait presque seule, en compagnie de rares buissons d'arbustes 
divers. On se fait difficilement une idee de l'etat de secheresse dans lequel se trouve 
la plante pendant la periode des grandes chaleurs; elle est dans un etat de demi- 
repos et ne parait pas en souffrir autrement, sa vegetation etant toute de printemps; 
au contraire, la floraison qui suit est toujours tres abondante." Lochot believed 
that the Lilac's area of distribution, extending the length of the Balkan Mountains, 
is too vast, and the plant appears too well adapted to its surroundings to be merely 
naturalized there. Growing in the Arnold Arboretum are three plants of 5. vulgaris 
which were raised from seed collected by Lochot in the mountains of Bulgaria. 

Three spontaneous varieties of the Common Lilac have been recorded, but all 
require further study. The first is: 

Syringa vulgaris var. transsilvanica Schur, Enum. PI. Transsilv. 451 (1866). — 
Borbas in Erdesz. Lap. 1882, 883. 

P. J. F. Schur described it as follows: "Foliis ovatis acuminatis in petiolum 
subito attenuatis crenulatis, minoribus"; he stated that it grew "Auf Limbert bei 
Vayda-Hunyad, den ganzen Abhang bekleidend." Vincenz von Borbas mentions 
it as one of two varieties of the Common Lilac native to Hungary and, following 
Schur's description, states that the leaf is smaller than that of the type, oval, 
pointed, suddenly narrowing into the petiole, and finely notched. Neither botanist 
cites any specimen. I know of no Lilac with finely notched or crenulate leaves 
although ciliolate leaves occasionally appear to be so. 

The second is: 

Syringa vulgaris var. mac[r]antha Borbas in Erdesz. Lap. 1882, 883. 

Borbas notes: "On Strazucs Mountain (near Mihald) its flower in a wild state 
is almost twice as large as that of the one in Kazan Valley, along the Lower Danube." 
Of this variety also Borbas cites no specimen. His name appears as macantha 
but, from the description, this is obviously a typographical error. 

The third is: 

Syringa vulgaris var. pulchella Velenovsky in Sitzungsb. Bohm. Gesellsch. Wissensch. 
Prag, Jahrg. 1893, no. xxxvu. 43 (1894). 

This variety was collected above Belledihan in Bulgaria. Velenovsky describes 
it as having pure white flowers, a longer corolla-tube, and lanceolate lobes with 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 217 

flat margins gradually pointed and once twisted. That he did not consider it to 
be identical with the white variety of the Common Lilac is indicated by the fact 
that he notes that in S. vulgaris the corolla is pink, red, violet or white. 

In J. Velenovsky's "Reliquiae Mrkvickanae" (20, 1922) is described as a new 
species a Syringa rhodopea which the author notes was collected in the Rhodope 
Mountains at Stanimaka by Stfibrny in 1900 and which is cultivated in the Botanic 
Garden at Prague. He describes it as having broadly cordate leaves, a very elon- 
gated panicle (about 20 cm. long) with horizontally spreading subdivisions, a 
short campanulate calyx, as long as broad and very short denticulate, the tube 
of the corolla slightly longer than the limb, the corolla-lobes spreading horizontally, 
rounded, and very many of the flowers five-lobed. Velenovsky notes that one 
sees at once that it is different from S. vulgaris which has ovate leaves, suberect 
subdivisions of the flower-panicle, a calyx longer than broad and with longer teeth, 
a corolla-tube much longer than the limb and with elliptic, suberect lobes and a 
four-parted flower. He believes his plant to be related to S. oblata from China with 
similar leaves but a shorter ovate panicle and subelliptic lobes in fours. This species 
is also noted by N. Stoianoff and B. Stefanoff (Fl. Bulg. 11. 876, 1925). 

Several attempts have been made to procure specimens and further information 
in regard to this species but no reply has been received to the inquiries. From the 
description alone it does not seem possible to determine the validity of this species. 
One finds broadly ovate leaves with cordate base in S. vulgaris; there is also con- 
siderable variation in the form of the flowers and a five-lobed corolla is not unusual. 
The Common Lilac has been found in the Rhodope Mountains and it may be that 
5. rhodopea is merely a variation. 

Loudon (Arb. Brit. 11. 1210, 1838) writes: "In the survey of the royal gardens 
of Nonsuch, planted in the time of Henry VIII. , there is mentioned a fountain 
set round with six lilac trees which bear no fruit, but only a very pleasant smell." 
"A New English Dictionary on Historical Principles" by Sir James A. H. Murray 
(Oxford, 1908) notes as follows: "1650 Surv. Non-such Palace, Archaeol. v. 434. 
A fountaine of white marble ... set round with six trees called lelack trees." 
In 1579 the Common Lilac was growing in the garden of John Gerard in London. 
In England, as on the continent, the plant was early appreciated and soon became 
everywhere naturalized. W. J. Bean writes : "Although not a true native of Britain, 
the Common Lilac has been in cultivation 300 years and no flowering shrub, either 
native or foreign, except the Rose, has been more closely identified with English 
gardens and English country scenes. Of the latter none is more characteristic of 
our flowering May-time than the cottage garden with its fragrant blossom-laden 
lilacs." 

While undoubtedly listed in English nursery catalogues of earlier date, it has 
been found in the following, — the earliest to which I have had access : as Common 
Blue Lilac (Burchell, 1764, 20); as Common Syringa or Pipe tree (Burchell, 1764, 
31) ; as Blue Syringa (Shiells, 1773, n) ; as S. vulgaris (Mackie, 1812, 54; Backhouse, 



218 THE LILAC 

1816, 45; Fulham Nursery, [cir. 1817], 26; Loddiges, 1820, 39; 1823, 35; 1826, 59; 
1836, 67; Colvill, 1821, 30); as S. coerulea (Miller (Bristol Nursery), 1826, 14); 
as S. vulgaris coerulea (Miller (Bristol Nursery), 1826, 14). 

As in England, the Common Lilac is now closely associated with our country 
landscape and especially with that of New England. The seventh edition of Asa 
Gray's "Manual of Botany" (652, 1908) notes that it is "not rarely found in a 
wild state." J. K. Small (Flora Southeast. U. S., ed. 2, 916, 1913) states that it 
occurs in "waste places ..." and most local floras of the northeastern United 
States now mention it as an escape. It is, so far as I know, escaped rather than 
naturalized. 

Alice Morse Earle in her "Old Time Gardens" (147, 190 1) writes: "It even grows 
wild in some localities, though it never looks wild, but plainly shows its escape or 
exile from some garden." Henry D. Thoreau (Walden, New Riverside Ed., n. 
407, 1893) describes vividly the associations which the Lilac brings to mind: "Still 
grows the vivacious lilac a generation after the door and lintel and the sill are gone, 
unfolding its sweet-scented flowers each spring, to be plucked by the musing travel- 
ler; planted and tended once by children's hands, in front-yard plots, — now stand- 
ing by wall-sides in retired pastures, and giving place to new-rising forests; — the 
last of that stirp, sole survivor of that family. Little did the dusky children think 
that the puny slip with its two eyes only, which they stuck in the ground in the 
shadow of the house and daily watered, would root itself so, and outlive them, 
and house itself in the rear that shaded it, and grown man's garden and orchard, 
and tell their story faintly to the lone wanderer a half century after they had grown 
up and died, — blossoming as fair, and smelling as sweet, as in that first spring. 
I mark its still tender, civil, cheerful, lilac colors." Poems too, such as Amy 
Lowell's "Lilacs," and Walt Whitman's "Warble for Lilac-time" and "When 
Lilacs last in the Dooryard Bloom'd," express the emotions aroused by this old 
garden favorite. 

The Lilac is at its best in situations where it has been permitted to grow without 
attention, receiving only such pruning as is done by nature or the occasional passer- 
by; where suckers have been allowed to come up at will and a thick symmetrical, 
round-topped clump has resulted. Where the plant has received careful attention 
and constant pruning the result is fine but of quite another character. Some of the 
oldest and best-cared-for specimens in New England are growing at the Governor 
Wentworth Mansion at Portsmouth, New Hampshire, now the home of Mr. 
J. Templeman Coolidge. They are believed to have been planted about 1750 and 
what was presumably at one time a hedge of ordinary dimensions is now about 
three times the width of those usually found, while the old bushes growing by the 
house are well-cared-for small trees. Mr. Coolidge wrote me, January 18, 1928, 
in regard to these small trees: "... the clumps just outside the front door . . . 
from very advanced age, have become trees of large girth (my memory says some 
10 inches diameter 3 feet above ground) and about 30 feet high." Where, as in 



SYRINGA VULGARIS £19 

this instance, the suckers have been removed the effect is more formal than where 
they have been allowed to remain. Photographs (no. 3150) of these Lilacs are in 
the collection of the Arnold Arboretum. 

The date of introduction of the Common Lilac to the United States is uncertain ; 
while the probability is that it came over with the early settlers it has been impos- 
sible to find any authentic record of its growing here before the last half of the 
eighteenth century; the early diaries, the colony records, have been searched, but 
have not yielded so much as the name; one finds records of such utilitarian 
plants as the Apple, and the Grape, and in early books of travel, such as Kalm's 
"A Voyage to North America," Josselyn's "New England's Rarities Discovered" 
and his account of his two voyages to New England, and Wood's "New England's 
Prospect" we find many references to native plants which were, very naturally, 
of greater interest because of their unfamiliarity. Even Darlington's "Memorials 
of John Bartram and Humphrey Marshall" fails to mention the Lilac, as does 
the correspondence between Collinson and Bartram found in the recent life of 
Peter Collinson written by Mr. Brett- James. This author kindly wrote me on 
June 28, 1926: "I have not found anything about it [the Lilac] in my perusal 
of the letters and I think I have looked pretty carefully through all that have come 
this way." This is interesting since in the "Asa Gray Bulletin" (111. 15, 1895) we 
find, under "Biographical Notes," the following quotation from the "New York 
Tribune," but without precise reference: "In 1753 we find Collinson sending, in 
addition to various fruit and shade trees many flowers which seem to have been 
new to America, to Bartram with others, like lilacs and double narcissus, which 
Bartram complains are already too numerous, as the roots brought by the early 
settlers had spread enormously." This extract is also quoted by Harshberger 
(Botanists of Philadelphia, 53, 1899); unfortunately it has not been possible to 
learn the source of the statement. 

The late Miss Harriet Keeler in her book "Our Northern Shrubs" wrote: "The 
year the Lilac was brought to America is in doubt, but we know that as early as 
1652, it, together with the Snowball, was the modest ornament of many a cottage 
yard." It has not been possible to learn where Miss Keeler obtained this precise 
date. In 1652 the Box bushes in the old garden at Sylvester Manor, Shelter Island, 
New York, were believed to have been planted and great hopes were entertained 
that there might be some record of the old Lilacs which grow there also; but Miss 
Cornelia Horsford, the present owner, wrote me: "There is a very old lilac hedge 
on top of a high stone wall facing a terrace, but although the wall undoubtedly 
dates from 1652, it could not be proved when or why it [the hedge] was planted 
there now." 

Of the date of planting of the Lilacs at the Governor Wentworth Mansion, Mr. 
Coolidge wrote: "These trees Miss Anna Cushing (the granddaughter of Mr. 
Charles Cushing who bought the place from the Wentworths in 1816) tells me she 
always heard called the Wentworth lilacs when she was a little girl living in the 



220 THE LILAC 

Mansion. The trees stand upon a narrow terrace whose stone wall is a continuation 
of the foundation of the house, and in type and rock is similar and evidently con- 
temporary. Now this terrace, narrow and long, and contained by walls on three 
sides, must have been meant for shrubs of some kind, and it seems quite possible 
that Wentworth set out the lilacs in that spot. If these are the Wentworth lilacs, 
Professor Sargent wrote me that they were the oldest in the country, those at Mt. 
Vernon, planted by Washington, coming next in order of time. It is possible that 
these are Wentworth lilacs, and even probable; but the testimony I give you cannot 
be taken as proof-absolute." 

Alice Morse Earle in the book already mentioned (p. 29) writes: "We find Sir 
Harry Frankland ordering Daffodils and Tulips from the garden he made for 
Agnes Surriage; and it is said that the first Lilacs ever seen in Hopkinton were 
planted by him for her." In the biography of Sir Charles Henry Frankland (41, 
1865) written by the Rev. Elias Nason is a description of the Frankland home at 
Hopkinton, Middlesex County, Massachusetts. This was a tract of 482 acres 
purchased in the years 1751 and 1752; the house, since destroyed by fire, having 
been built in 1751. Nason writes: "Having a taste for horticulture he [Frankland] 
introduced a great variety of the choicest fruit, — such as apples, pears, plums, 
peaches, cherries of excellent quality, apricots and quinces from England : — and 
having an eye for beauty, he set out elms and other ornamental trees upon his 
grounds, and embellished his walks and garden with the box, the lilac, hawthorn 
and the rose: some portion of this shrubbery blooms as beautifully as when King 
George the Second sat upon the throne." A footnote states further: "Two rows 
of box still remain, having attained the height of about ten feet; it is the largest 
[1862] in the country. The trunks of some of the lilacs are eight inches in diameter, 
and the red roses still continue to bloom as in times of old." It has not been possible 
to verify Nason's first statement and he does not .give the source of his information. 
A visit to the Hopkinton place made in the spring of 1926 shows that the box no 
longer exists except for a small fragment, having been killed to the ground in one 
hard winter since the present owner took possession twelve years ago; the Lilacs 
which remain near the site of the old barn, while handsome, are not unusually 
large. They may possibly be suckers from the original plants. 0. W. Holmes' 
poem "Agnes" mentions the box, the lilacs and the elms; and one finds frequent 
reference to these Frankland Lilacs. 

Considerable information of a like character is easily obtainable but authentic 
records are few and occur absurdly late we must believe. In the library of the 
Massachusetts Historical Society is the interesting old "Garden Book" of Thomas 
Jefferson. It is written in longhand and dates from 1766 to 1824; for several 
years the entries relate to Shadwell, Virginia, where the statesman and President 
was born, but the greater part of the entries apply to his later home, Monticello, 
a spot not far removed from his birthplace. Among the Shadwell records of 1767 
appears the following, under date of Apr[il] 2: "planted Lilac, Spanish broom, 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 221 

Umbrella, Laurel, Almonds, Muscle plumbs, Cayenne pepper"; and, following 
entries made at Monticello on September] 30, we find various lists, among them 
one reading: "Trees. Lilac. — Wild Cherry. — Dogwood. — Red-bud. — Horse- 
chestnut. . . ." The year 1767 marks therefore the earliest authentic record known 
to me of the presence of the Common Lilac in the United States. 

We find the Lilac mentioned also in Washington's diaries; it was growing at 
Mount Vernon, and Washington, like many other amateur gardeners, appears to 
have done considerable transplanting: "Thursday, 3rd, [March, 1785]. . . likewise 
took up the clump of Lilacs that stood at the corner of the South Grass plat and 
transplanted them to the clusters in the shrubberies and standards at the South 
Garden gate"; "Thursday, 29th, [March, 1785] transplanted in the groves at the 
ends of the House the following young trees, viz. 9 live Oak, 1 1 Yew or Hemlock 
2 Lilacs, 3 Fringe . . ."; "Friday 10th, [February, 1786] . . . the buds of the lylack 
were much swelled and seemed ready to unfold" (Diaries of George Washington, 
edited by J. C. Fitzpatrick, 11. 346, 355; in. 12, 1925). 

The plant is also mentioned by the Rev. Manasseh Cutler (Life, Journals and 
Correspondence, 1. 201, 1888) who, in a diary, notes: "April 23 [1787] Lilac buds 
advanced so as to open and leaves appear." 

Together with S. chinensis and 5. persica the Common Lilac was cultivated 
in the Elgin Botanic Garden near the city of New York, which was established 
in 1801 (D. Hosack, Hort. Elgin. 181 1). In Robert Carr's catalogue of Bartram's 
garden published in 181 4 both the Common Lilac and its white variety are listed. 
It is named by W. D. Peck among the plants growing in the Botanic Garden 
at Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1818 (Cat. Amer. For. PI. Bot. Gard. Cambridge, 
Mass. 1, 1818). Over one hundred years ago W. P. G. Barton (Fl. Phila. Prodr. 
13, 181 5) mentions it among the plants collected within ten miles of Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania; his flora lists indigenous plants and others "either naturalized or 
so commonly cultivated among us, that it has been deemed expedient to introduce 
them into this Prodromus." 

As in the case of English nursery catalogues, those of early date in this country 
are difficult to obtain; the Common Lilac appears however, in that of William 
Prince (43, 1823) and in that of Landreth (27, 1824) ; after 1825 it is found frequently 
mentioned. 

The Common Lilac has been associated for so many years with the homes of 
Europe, of England and of America that it has acquired a great number of names, 
many of them corruptions of those used by the botanists, others simple, homely 
and often picturesque. 

In botanical literature the name Lilac was first used by Mattioli in the edition 
of his "Commentarii" which was printed in 1565. According to Noah Porter 
(Webster's Internat. Diet, with Suppl., new ed., 1900) the word is derived from the 
"Pers[ian] lilaj, lilanj, lilang, nilaj, nil, the indigo plant, or from the kindred lilak, 
bluish, the flowers being named from the color." (See also Sir James A. H. Murray, 



222 THE LILAC 

New Engl. Diet. Hist. Princ, Oxford, 1908.) Among English speaking peoples this 
name appears in a number of forms; A. B. Lyons (PL Names Sci. Pop. 450, 1907) 
mentions Lilach, Lelach, Laylock, and Lily-oak which last he calls a verbal cor- 
ruption. Bacon in his essay "On Gardens" calls it the "Lelack Tree." Murray 
cites lalock as vernacular in the United States; O. W. Holmes (Prof. Breakf. Table, 
chap. 11.) so spells it: "Lalocks flowered late that year, and he got a great bunch 
off from the bushes in the Hancock front yard"; Lowell (Bigelow Papers, ser. 2, 
no. 6) uses Laylock: "The cat-bird in the laylock-bush is loud"; Alice Morse Earle 
(Old Time Gardens, 140, 1901) writes: "Walter Savage Landor, when Laylock had 
become antiquated, still clung to the word and used it with a stubborn persistence 
such as he alone could compass, which seems strange in the most finished classical 
scholar of his day." Britten and Holland (Diet. Engl. PI. Names, 302, 1886) refer 
to the name Laylock or Laylocks as "A common mispronunciation of Lilac, Syringa 
L." and record its use in the following counties of England: Gloucestershire 
(Pulman); Somersetshire; Surrey (according to the English Dialect Society, C. 3); 
Sussex (Parish); Warwickshire (E. D. S. Gloss. C. 3); and Yorkshire (Holderness) 
(E. D. S. Gloss. C. 7). Of the name Lily-oak, they note (p. 307) : "a corruption of 
Lilac, Syringa vulgaris L.," used in Scotland according to Jamieson. 

The word Syringa is derived from the Greek 2vpiy£, Syrinx, meaning a 
shepherd's pipe, a flute, etc. Ovid in his "Metamorphoses," tells the story of 
Syrinx, a nymph of Arcady, who, when pursued by Pan, was changed into a reed. 
From this reed Pan made the first flute or pipe of Pan. Of the Syringa G. Don 
(Gen. Syst. rv. 51, 1838) writes: ". . . the branches are long and straight and 
are filled with medulla; hence the old name of the lilac, pipe- tree"; Loudon (Arb. 
Brit. 11. 1208, 1838) also: "the tubes of the finest Turkish pipes are manufactured 
from the wood of this shrub and also from that of Philadelphus coronarius, hence 
the old English Pipe-tree which was applied both to the Philadelphus and to the 
Syringa"; Parkinson (Paradisi, 407, 1629) calls it The blew Pipe-tree, a name 
which appears in more modern usage as Blue Pipe- tree; Alice Morse Earle states 
that she has heard the name used in recent years by a native of Narragansett, 
Rhode Island; Loudon calls it also Pipe-Privet; Philip Miller (Cat. PI. 45, 1730) 
calls it Pipe-tree and H. L. Gerth van Wijk (Diet. PI. Names, 1. 1307, 191 1) cites 
Pipe as also used. Bailey (Diet. Rust. ed. 3, 1726) refers to it as Pistick or Pipe- 
Tree with blue flowers. 

The blooming-time of the Lilac is recorded in the English name May-flower 
mentioned by Richard Folkard Jr. (Plant Lore, 59, 1884) : "In Cornwall and Devon 
Lilac is esteemed the May-flower"; May-plant is mentioned in Meehan's Monthly 
(n. 27, 1892); May by Gerth van Wijk. Britten and Holland (1. c, p. 328) note 
that the name May flower is used in Cornwall, in gardens, and May in Devonshire. 
Meehan's Monthly also mentions Princess feather flower which Lyons notes is 
better applied to another plant; Gerth van Wijk cites also princy feather and 
prince's feather, the latter G. Clarke Nuttall (Beautiful Flowering Shrubs, 101, 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 223 

1923) says is "a pretty Cornish name due to its plumes of flowers." Britten and 
Holland (1. c, p. 390) cite it as used in Devonshire and Rutlandshire (Uppingham) 
and note: "pronounced Princy Feather without the s of the possessive case." 
Duck's bills is cited in Meehan's Monthly and Nuttall states that this is due to 
the shape of the flower buds; to me it seems more probable that it has its origin 
in the appearance of the fruit capsules. Britten and Holland (1. c, p. 531), on 
the authority of a friend, cite Duck's bills as used in Devonshire. Blue Ash, 
Spanish Ash, White Ash are cited by Meehan's Monthly as names which are im- 
properly applied; Nuttall suggests that the practice of grafting the Lilac on the 
Ash may have a bearing upon these names. Britten and Holland (1. c, p. 
513) mention Blue Ash as used in Gloucestershire (Chedworth) and state: 
"the white variety is called White Ash"; they also mention (p. 445) Spanish Ash 
as used in Gloucestershire (Fairford). Lyons quotes Roman Willow as also im- 
properly applied; its significance is not apparent; Britten and Holland (1. c, 
p. 406) mention it as used in Lincolnshire according to the English Dialect Society 
(Gloss. C. 6) and to Notes and Queries (ser. 2, vn. 385). Nor is the derivation of the 
name Oysters, mentioned by Gerth van Wijk and others, apparent; possibly this 
may also have been suggested by the two-parted fruit. Britten and Holland 
(1. c, p. 568), on the authority of a friend, note of Oysters: "The name by which 
bunches of lilac-blossom are known in North Devon." Syring, obviously a corrup- 
tion, is cited by Gerth van Wijk, and Bailey (Diet. Rust. ed. 3, 1726) calls it "the 
blue syringe." The name Scotch Lilac mentioned by Lyons is only correctly 
applied to the purple variety (see S. vulgaris var. purpurea). T. R. Sim (Flower- 
ing Trees So. Africa, 12, 142, fig. no, 1919) calls it "the English Lilac." 

Of the superstitions connected with the plant Alice Morse Earle writes: "And 
there was a love divination by Lilacs which we children solemnly observed. There 
will occasionally appear a tiny Lilac flower, usually a white Lilac, with five divisions 
of the petal instead of four — this is a Luck Lilac. This must be solemnly swallowed. 
If it goes down smoothly, the dabbler in magic cries out, 'He loves me' ; if she chokes 
at her floral food, she must say sadly, 'He loves me not'. ... In the West Indies 
the Lilac is a flower of mysterious power; its perfume keeps away evil spirits, 
ghosts, banshees. [It is doubtful whether the Lilac grows in the climate of the 
West Indies and the reference is probably to some plant called by the natives 
Lilac, possibly the Melia Azedarach Linnaeus.] If it grows not in the dooryard, its 
protecting branches are hung over the doorway. I think of this when I see it 
shading the door of happy homes in New England." It seems indeed probable 
that good fortune has been associated with this plant and may in the early days 
have accounted for some of its popularity. Dr. E. M. Kronfeld (Mitt. Deutsch. 
Dendr. Ges. no. 27, 209, 1918) states that the German common name Hollunder 
may be in part derived from the name of the goddess Holla, protectress of the 
household. 

There do not appear to be as great a number of vernacular names for the 



224 THE LILAC 

Common Lilac among the French-speaking peoples as among the English or the 
German. Lilas, Lilas commun, Lilas vulgaire are those most frequently used. As 
noted in the text the first mention of the plant appears in Belon's "Observations" 
of 1554, — as Queue de Regnard; Bulliard (Introd. Fl. Envir. Paris, t. 4, 1776) 
calls it the Queue de Renard des Jardiniers; and Gerth van Wijk cites queue de 
renard de jardin. He also mentions clawsony which he notes is Walloon, jasmin, 
also Walloon, and cited on the authority of Paque (Vlaamsche Volksn. PI. 1896), 
as well as mouguet and mouget for which he gives as authority Prof. K. W. von 
Dalla Torre (Die volksthiimliche Pflanzennamen in Tirol und Vorarlberg, 1895); 
muguet is the French name for the Lily-of-the-valley. The name bellegrappe 
used by Reneaulme (Spec. Hist. PI. 31, 161 1) has reference presumably to the 
flower cluster which Gerard had earlier described (Herball, Bk. hi. 12 13, 1597) 
as "compact, of many small flowers, in the form of a bunch of grapes." Jean Des 
Moulins in his translation of Jacques Dalechamps' "Histoire gen6rale des Plantes 
. . ." (1. 300, fig. 1653) calls it Syringue ayant la fleur incarnate, Lilac de Matthiol. 
As mentioned earlier in the text Duhamel de Monceau called it the Lilas des bois 
a fleur d'un bleu pale. Charles Morren (Bull. Acad. Sci. Belg. ser. 1, 273, 1853) 
calls it Lilas de Constantinople. 

It is in the German language and its dialects that we find the greatest number 
of common names for this plant. 

In the German the Lilac is called Flieder, — Gemeiner Flieder corresponding 
to the English Common Lilac and the French Lilas commun. Kronfeld states that 
the word appears to have originated in Flanders and to have been derived from the 
Dutch vlieder, meaning to flutter, perhaps because of the fluttering leaves; or 
possibly, he adds, from the word Fliehbaum (the tree with the transitory or quickly 
falling leaves), — the syllable der, as in the name Holder {Holler), being considered, 
not as a meaningless suffix, but as the old dar, deru (tree) from the Greek dry, 
the English tree. Weinmann in 1748 cites Spaansche Vlier as "Hoogduits." Gerth 
van Wijk cites blauer flieder, flinder, flirr(a), floren, the last two names on the 
authority of G. Pritzel and E. Jessen (Die deutschen Volksnamen der Pflanzen, 
1882) ; on the same authority he also cites spanchenflorer, spansche fleder, spansch- 
fleder. G. Hegi (111. Fl. Mittel-Eur., 1. c.) mentions also Fliider, Flirra (Low 
German) and Flider (Switzerland). The names Spanischer Flieder and Turkischer 
Flieder appear frequently, the attributes Spanish and Turkish having presumably 
reference to the supposed origin of the plant, although Kronfeld states that the 
adjective Spanish merely denotes a foreign or distant origin. 

The name Hollunder is frequently used instead of Flieder. Kronfeld tells us 
that in Austria the plant was known as Holler (Holunder) ; the word is frequently 
spelt Hollunder. This name was, and is, commonly applied to the European Elder, 
Sambucus nigra Linnaeus, and, according to Kronfeld, to other shrubs such as the 
Mock-Orange [ = Philadelphus coronarius Linnaeus] and the wild Snowball [ = Vibur- 
num opulus Linnaeus]. He states that the word is derived from hohl, meaning 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 225 

hollow, because of the hollowed, pith-filled branches of the Elder and as already 
noted, possibly had a connection with the name of the goddess Holla, protectress of 
the household. Ruppius (Fl. Jenensis, 24, 1745) called it Spanischer Holunder; 
Weinmann in 1748 also cites welscher Holler; Duroi (Harbk. Baumz. n. 443, 1772) 
cites Der gemeine blaue Spanische Hollunder and der Turkische Hollunder; Gerth 
van Wijk cites blauer hohler, blauer holder, blauer holunder, spanischer holler, 
spanischer holunder, turkischer holunder, turkischer holder and other names as 
follows : on the authority of A. Voss (Salomon's Worterbuch der Deutschen Pflanzen- 
namen . . . umgearbeitet von A. Voss, 1903), falscher holler, falscher holunder; of 
C. J. Durheim (Schweizerisches Pflanzen-Idiotikon, 1856) spanischer holder; of 
Pritzel and Jessen (1. c.) welscher holder; of Torre (1. c.) weisser holler, weisser 
holunder; the last two names presumably should apply to the white variety {S. 
vulgaris var. alba). G. Hegi (1. c.) cites also spaensche Ellhoern ( = Hol- 
under) (Schleswig), Holder (e) (Swabia, Switzerland), Baure-Holder (Franconia) 
and Schmeckholler (from its pleasant fragrance) (Upper Franconia). 

The name Syringa appears in a number of different spellings, corruptions and 
combinations. Ruppius (1. c.) mentions Sirenien; Weinmann in 1748 calls it 
Hemelsblaauwe Syringeboom; Duroi (1. c.) Syringenstrauch; Schkuhr (Bot. Handb. 
1. 8, 1 791) Blauer Dosten Zirinten and Syrenen; Roth (Man. Bot. Prodr. 1. 8, 1830) 
Gemeine Sirenen; Mertens and Koch (Rohling's Deutschl. Fl. 1. 301, 1823) Zirinken; 
Gerth van Wijk cites numerous other forms for the word: sirene, syrene(n), syringe, 
syringenbaum, syringsstrauch, syringsbaum, syringenstrauch, ziren-chen, zirene, 
ziricke, zirin(c)ken, zyringe; on the authority of Nemnich (Allgemeines Polyglotten- 
Lexicon der Naturgeschichte, 1 793-1 795) gemeine syringa and syrenie, of Pritzel 
and Jessen eddelzierinjen, syrike, syringbaum, zerinje, zirenje, zitrene; of A. Voss 
(1. c.) syringsblume; Kronfeld notes that in Thuringia the name Zerentschen is 
used and in Lower Germany Zirenien, while among peoples of Alemannian origin 
appears Zirinken. G. Hegi (1. c.) cites also Siereen, Zorene, Ziereenje, Zieren'n 
(Gotha), Zitrenchen (North Thuringia), Zitterene (Hesse), Zerinke (Palatinate 
of the Rhine) , Zirinke (Alemannian) , Zitterink, Zitterinz (Alsace) , Zitronchenbaum, 
Rosinenbaum (upper Hartz); and he notes that the Alsatian Zittelbast has refer- 
ence to the Seidelbast [ = Daphne Mezereum Linnaeus] to which its flowers are 
(?) similar in form. 

The name Lilac according to Kronfeld was once commonly used in Germany 
and is now heard in the Tyrol and on the Rhine. Gerth van Wijk cites blauer 
lilak and lila(c)k; also, on the authority of Pritzel and Jessen, lila. Wilhelm Ulrich 
(Internationales Worterbuch der Pflanzennamen, 230, 1872) cites lilak as the com- 
mon German name. 

The Pipe-tree of the English finds its German counterpart in such names as 
pfeifen-baum, pfeifenstrauch, spanischer pfeifenbaum, all cited by Gerth van Wijk. 
Duroi (1. c.) calls it in 1772 Der Pfeifenstrauch, and Houttuyn (1. c.) in 1778 
Pfeifenbaum. 



226 THE LILAC 

It is probable that the following names arose because of the similarity, in form, 
of the Lilac flower when in bud and the clove: Gerth van Wijk mentions essnageli 
and nageleinbaum, and on the authority of Pritzel and Jessen nagaliblust, nagel- 
chen, nagelgartenbluthen, nageliblust, nagelkes, nagels-baum; of Nemnich, nagel- 
chensblumen, nagleinbaum and of Paque rassnagabluh. Kronfeld states that Rass- 
nagabluh is used in the Austrian Alps. He quotes E. Fettweis (Volkstiimliche 
Pflanzennamen von Niederrhein, 1916) as stating that the names Nallchesblum 
and Nagelkes which are also used, are suggested by the resemblance of the flowers 
[flower-bud] to a nail. Kronfeld believes that these names resemble those of the 
carnation and the clove and refers to his history of the carnation (Vienna, 1913). 
G. Hegi (1. c.) also notes names derived from the resemblance to the clove and men- 
tions Gewiirznelken (buds of Caryophyllus aromalicus; he refers for the word "Nelke" 
to his vol. in. 319), Niagelken, Nagel(ke)bom (Low German), Nalchesblume, 
Nagelcher (Franconia), Groffensnall (from Caryophyllus) (Aix-la-Chapelle) , 
Nagala (Swabia), Nageli, Essnageli (bloust) (Switzerland). Ruppius (1. c.) in 1745 
cites Nageleinbaum among other common names for the Lilac. See also S. villosa 
and S. pubescens. 

The English name May-plant has also a German counterpart: Gerth van Wijk 
mentions, on authority of Pritzel and Jessen, maiablust, and Kronfeld Maiblum 
which he notes is used along the Lower Rhine. Other names which refer to the 
season of bloom at Whitsuntide or Pentecost are also cited : by Kronfeld, Pangstblum 
(Pfingstblum) , also used along the Lower Rhine; and by Gerth van Wijk, Pingster- 
blomen, on the authority of Pritzel and Jessen. G. Hegi (1. c.) states that the 
following are derived from the blooming season in May, Whitsuntide (Pfingster) 
and Ascension Day (Christi Himmelfahrt) : Maiblom (Bergenland), Maibluem 
(Alsace), Maierosli (Baden), Maiebluest (Switzerland), Maia, Maibliia(h) (upper 
Bavaria), Pinksterblome or Pinksterbloume (Low German), Pfingste-Glesli 
("Glesli" probably = Hyacinthe), Pfeistblueme (Switzerland) and Ufertsbluest 
(Basel). 

The old French name Queue de Regnard appears in the German as Fuchs- 
schwanz (Houttuyn, 1. c). Ruppius and numerous later writers mention the 
curious old name Huck auf die Magd, Gerth van Wijk citing also the spelling hock 
auf (der magd) on the authority of Pritzel and Jessen. Kronfeld writes that the 
name appears in Saxony as Kuffdemad. He suggests that this name comes from 
the children's game "pick-a-back" applied to their other game of inserting the 
corolla-tubes of the Lilac flowers one within the other. Alice Morse Earle (1. c.) 
has spoken of this method of making little necklaces of the flowers. Kronfeld also 
mentions that the German children make wreaths in this same way, press them, 
and believe that the child whose wreath retains its color best will receive an espe- 
cially good report card at Michaelmas. For the name Huck auf die Magd and its 
corruptions G. Hegi (1. c.) gives the explanation: — "coire; Blutezeit im Mai, 
starker auf die sexuelle Sphare wirkender Duft," and cites the following: Huckuf- 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 227 

demad, Huppufdemad, Kufdemad, Huckauf, Huppuff (Saxony , North-Thuringia) , 
Hub-uf-de-Me (Altenburg) andHep(e)timat (Upper Hesse). Willkomm (Fiihr. Reich 
Deutsch. Pflanz. 445, 1863) mentions the name Jelangerjelieber. This is a German 
name for the Honeysuckle the flowers of which were possibly thought to bear a 
resemblance to those of the Lilac, or possibly to possess a similar fragrance. Kron- 
feld states that this name is used in northern Germany. Of Je langer je lieber 
(for which name he refers to Lonicera caprifolium) G. Hegi (1. c.) cites the Thur- 
ingian forms: Langelieber, Eng(e)lalieb(e)r, and Liwerangl. The Wild Marjoram, 
called in German Dost, also lends its name to the Lilac; blaue dosten and blauer 
dosten being cited by Gerth van Wijk and Blauer Dosten Zirinten by Schkuhr 
(1. c). Gerth van Wijk also cites the name wilder jasmin. 

A number of miscellaneous common names for the Lilac which are used in 
Germany are mentioned by Gerth van Wijk: blaue blust, citrenchen, hiittenblume, 
kandel-bliite [this is cited by Wilhelm Ulrich (Internationales Worterbuch der 
Pflanzennamen, 230, 1872) as die Kandelbliithe], weinblume?; and on the authority 
of Nemnich, blaue bliithe; of Pritzel and Jessen, corinde, engellalieber, kandel- 
baum, kandel-bluh, lirberebaum, studentenblom, zitelbascht; of Durheim, schnee- 
ballenbaum; of Torre, spanisch bluest [Vorarlb.]. Kronfeld says that the last 
is used in the Austrian Alps. Silberbliithe is cited by Gartenflora (in. 60, 1854). 
G. Hempelmann (Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 28, 321, 1919) writes: "in 
meiner Heimat Siidoldenburg, sogenanntes Miinsterland, der Flieder (Syringa 
vulgaris) Sandrin'n oder Sanderin'n genannt wird. (Das Anfangs-s scharf gespro- 
chen, wie ss.)" Among miscellaneous folknames G. Hegi also cites Kaneelblom, 
Kaneelroes (Schleswig), Pastorenblom, Kasblom (Bergenland), Lemerschwenz 
(from the form of the flower cluster) (Upper Hesse) [this name means tail of the 
lamb and suggests the old name Queue de Renard of Belon], Muhlenblume (district 
of the Moselle), Weinblume (Baden), Wietruba (St. Gallen), Huppendinges (for 
the manufacture of "Huppen "-pipes; Hegi refers to Sorbus aucuparia) (Lothringia) , 
and Zuckerblueme (Alsace). 

Kronfeld mentions various superstitions associated with the plant: he states 
that in Germany the opinion is widely held that, when the Lilac flowers, people 
become especially tired and indolent; the German peasant puts a spray of it on 
the roof to ward off lightning; he picks in a particular way, at a particular time, 
a certain number of Lilac flowers with which on a certain day he smokes out the 
rooms of his house to keep away rats and mice; if a branch, picked on December 
fourth, and put in water, shows leaves at Christmas, to the young maiden it pre- 
sages a desired marriage. I have found no references to these superstitions else- 
where. 

Among the Dutch-speaking peoples also a considerable number of common 
names are used to refer to the Lilac. Commelin (Cat. PI. Hort. Med. Amstelodam. 
340, 1689) calls it Syringa met blaauwe blom. Gerth van Wijk mentions sering; 
and on the authority of Dr. J. B. Henkel (Medizinisch-pharmazeutische Botanik, 



228 THE LILAC 

1862) gnofFelsneggel, kattestert, kennekesblom, kroednagel, kroednegel, kruid- 
nagels, kriinagelboompje, meibloem, nagel, nagelbloem, nagelblom, nageltakken, 
pinksterblom, sijringeboom, Sint Jansbloem, sireen, striengen, tronkaarts and 
zuiglammetjes. These names with a number of Flemish ones appear in H. 
Henkels' "Woordenboek der Nederlandsche Volksnamen van Planten" (249, 
1907). On the authority of Paque, van Wijk cites djezemijne(n), dzozemienen, 
jasmienen, jasmijnen, jassemienen, jesemienen, jesumiene, jesumiene-boom, jize- 
miene, jozzemiene(n), juzemienen, kruidnagel-bloemen, kruinagels, lielas', lylac, 
meibloeme(n), nagelkruid, serienen, singelingen, Sint Joris' houtbloem, Sint 
Servaas' bloemen, and sussemienen; of Dr. H. van Hall (De Kruidtuin van's 
Rijks Hoogere Burgerschool te Middelburg, 187 1) blauwe syringa, gewone sering, 
lillach; of Denken de Bo's Kruidwoordenboek bewrocht en uitgegeven door 
Joseph Samijn, Prof, in't Collegie te Meenen, 1888, jasmijn, joosmijn; of Paque 
tchieuzemiene. Nees (PL Offic. 1. 214, t. 1828) mentions Gemeene Syring. 

Borbas (A Kert, 1. 245, 1895) calls S. vulgaris "magyar orgonafa" or Hungarian 
Lilac and writes: "We may call it Hungarian, for the southeastern calcareous 
region of our country is unquestionably its place of origin." 

Guylas (A Syringa Josikaea Jacq. fil. es a Syringa Emodi Wallich, 1909; see 
bibliography of S. Josikaea for reference) notes in Hungarian: ". . . S. vulgaris and 
the other cultivated Syringa species also have common names, such as Borostyan, 
Lila-Fa (near Dioszegi-Fazekas) which came from the word Lilac (Tournefort), 
Szelence (across the Danube) ; Boroszlan (on the other bank of the Danube and the 
Moldava), Tengeri Bodza, indiai Mogyoro, Orgovanyfa, and Orgonafa. The latter 
is the real Hungarian one and the one generally accepted and applied." 

In Rumania according to Baumgarten (Enum. Stirp. Transsilv. 1. 16, 1816) the 
Lilac is called Lila, Malin rosu, and Szkumpine. In Hungary, according to the 
same authority it is called Borostyanfa and Szelentzefa; Nees (1. c.) cites Borostyan 
as also used; and Kronfeld mentions Orgonafa (Orgelpfeife) meaning organ-pipe. 

Nees cites Siringa as used in Italy, Lilaz in Portugal, Lila in Spain, Syreen in 
Switzerland, Serik in Russia and Spanskflitter in Denmark. Kronfeld cites Lila 
as Portuguese and Lilac as Spanish. G. Hegi mentions Lilach (Saxony), Lila 
(Alsace) and Lilak (Argau [a district in Switzerland]). 

In Russia the name for Lilac is Siren. In Latvia it is called Cerines. 

Kronfeld tells us, quoting Jirecek, that the "Lilac Wood" (gora liljakowa, 
ljulekowa) is often besung in Bulgarian folksongs. He also states that in Persia 
in ancient times the Lilac was believed to be sacred and that there, to this day, 
the homes and persons of the sick are decorated with the plant; while in Turkey 
and Russia the Lilac is connected with death and the foretelling of death. 

Some of the early descriptions of the Common Lilac are even more suggestive 
of the plant than are more recent, and probably more technically accurate ones. 
Gerard (Herball, Bk. in. 12 14, fig. 1597) writes: "The blew Pipe groweth likewise 
in manner of a smal hedge tree, with many shootes rising from the roote like the 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 229 

former, as our common Privet doth, wherof it is a kinde. The branches have some 
small quantitie of pith in the middle of the wood, and are covered with a darke 
black greenish barke or rinde. The leaves are exceeding greene and crumpled or 
turned up like the brims of a hat, in shape very like unto the leaves of the Poplar 
tree: among which come the flowers of an exceeding faire blewe colour, compact 
of many small flowers, in the forme of a bunch of grapes, eache flower is in shew 
like those of Valeriana rubra Dodonaei, consisting of fower parts like a little star, 
of an exceeding sweete savour and smel, but not so strong as the former [the white 
Pipe = Philadelphus coronarius Linnaeus]. When these flowers be gone, there 
succeede flat cods and somewhat long, which being ripe are of a light colour, with 
a thin membrane or filme in the midst, wherein are seedes almost fower square, 
narrow and ruddie." 

Another somewhat similar description was written by John Parkinson (Paradisi, 
407, 1629): "The blew Pipe tree riseth sometimes to be a great tree, as high and 
bigge in the bodie as a reasonable Apple tree (as I have in some places seene and 
observed) but most usually groweth lower, with many twigs or branches rising 
from the roote, having as much pith in the middle of them as the Elder hath, 
covered with a grayish greene barke, but darker in the elder branches, with joynts 
set at a good distance one from another, and two leaves at every joynt, which are 
large, broad, and pointed at the ends, many of them turning or folding both the 
sides inward, and standing on long foote stalkes: at the toppes of the branches 
come forth many flowers, growing spike-fashion, that is, a long branch of flowers 
upon a stalke, each of these flowers are small, long, and hollow belowe, ending above 
in a pale blewish flower, consisting of foure small leaves, of a pretty small sent: 
after the flowers are past, there come sometimes (but it is not often in our Country, 
unlesse the tree have stood long, and is grown great, the suckers being continually 
taken away, that it may growe the better) long and flat cods, consisting as it were 
of two sides, a thin skinne being in the midst, wherein are contained two long 
flattish red seede: the rootes are strong, and growe deepe in the ground." 

Linnaeus merely describes Syringa vulgaris as "Syringa foliis ovato cordatis." 

It is at this date impossible to identify any plant now in existence as the rep- 
resentative, strictly speaking, of the original Common Lilac. This was of course 
a cultivated plant; probably its nearest approach is found in the old Lilac which we 
see growing uncared for by deserted homes or subspontaneously by country road- 
sides; these plants have, in general, flower-clusters which are almost cylindrical in 
form when fully open and which in color tone are intermediate between dark and 
pale; their color ranges from a reddish blue in bud to a pinkish blue or bluish pink 
when expanded and they possess a delicious fragrance in every instance. 

Growing in the Arnold Arboretum are three plants (no. 17,363 Arn. Arb.) 
which were raised from seed collected by J. Lochot, in the mountains of Bulgaria, 
where, as already noted, he had observed the species growing spontaneously. This 
seed was forwarded from France by Mr. Maurice de Vilmorin and received in 



230 THE LILAC 

December, 1905. While possessing the botanical characters associated with the 
garden form these plants have a distinctive appearance which does not suggest 
that of a cultivated Lilac. A considerable difference is to be observed in the in- 
dividual flowers, in the shape of the clusters and in the amount of bloom yearly- 
produced on the three plants, but, in all, the inflorescence is more open and inter- 
rupted than that found on old cultivated plants where the cluster is, in general, 
well-filled, and, as noted, somewhat cylindrical in form. In habit these shrubs 
are also less compact than old garden Lilacs. All three bloom profusely each 
year although one is especially floriferous, and their long clusters are fragrant and 
showy. The winter buds, the foliage, the fruit and the bark show no characters 
distinguishing them from the cultivated plant. The foliage is retained, still green, 
into late autumn. 

The further north one goes, within reason, the better the Common Lilac thrives. 
Professor Sargent and others tell of having seen what are probably some of the 
largest and handsomest Lilacs on this continent growing on the island of Mackinaw 
in Lake Superior. E. H. Wilson (Aristocrats of the Garden, 213, 191 7), referring 
to the genus as a whole, writes: "For regions where cold winters are followed by 
dry summers they are ideal shrubs . . . not only are Lilacs quite hardy in the colder 
parts of New England and elsewhere but they thrive better there than they do across 
the water in Great Britain. . . . They are essentially plants for northern New Eng- 
land and regions of a similar climate; in southern New England and southward 
the leaves in summer are often temporarily disfigured by mildew." Dr. W. T. 
Macoun (Report of the Dominion Horticulturist for the year 1922, p. 38) mentions 
S. vulgaris among the best ornamental shrubs hardy at Ottawa, Canada. Des- 
fontaines (Hist. Arb. Arbris. 1. 99, 1809) has been told by Vahl that the Common 
Lilac is cold resistant in Norway where it is grown in the open; C. Martins (Rev. 
Hort. 1845, 433) states that it is cultivated at Um6o, Sweden, and Kuphaldt 
(Mitt. Deutsch. Dendr. Ges. no. 24, 231, 191 5) that it is hardy at Riga, Russia. 
Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883), notes the form of 5. vulgaris, 
e. coerulea, as frequent. T. R. Sim (Fl. Trees and Shrubs So. Africa, 12, 142, 
fig. no, 1919) mentions it "for cold districts" and notes that it "does not do well 
in subtropical conditions." Sir Dietrich Brandis (Indian Trees, 445, 1906) cites 
it as cultivated in the British Indian Empire. 

Asa Gray (Scientific Papers of Asa Gray, selected by C. S. Sargent, 1. 75, 1889) 
in a review of Arthur Henfrey's book "An Elementary Course of Botany" (1857) 
wrote: "Very singular is the statement (p. 68) that in England 'the terminal bud 
of the Lilac is generally killed by the frost in the winter'; since in our much colder 
winter it is as completely hardy as the other buds whenever it happens to be formed, 
and, like them, is well developed before summer is over. As a general rule here, and 
we presume in England also, no terminal winter bud appears during the growing 
season, and so there is none to be killed by the frost of the following winter." 

Much has been written upon the best method of propagating the Lilac and a 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 231 

great difference of opinion has been expressed upon the subject. In the opinion 
of the author, whose experience is that of the owner of purchased plants, not that 
of the propagator, the most satisfactory plants are those upon their own roots; 
all suckers which appear are then true to name and only such as are not desired 
need be removed, and as a means of renewing an old plant or improving its shape 
suckers may be of value. To propagate Lilacs from cuttings, the method commonly 
used in this country to produce Lilacs upon their own roots, is a slower method than 
by grafting, and, to obtain rapidly plants of a saleable size, the grafting or budding 
method upon Common Lilac, upon Privet or upon various other stocks has been 
much employed. The subject is discussed in some detail in a later chapter. 

The attempt has been made to use the Lilac as a stock upon which to graft 
the Olive; Pepin (Rev. Hort. 1856, 372) noted that this was tried by Perrault 
of Sussy, near Paris, France. 

Ordinarily when the Common Lilac is grown as a specimen it receives only such 
pruning as is necessary to keep it in strong condition and to ensure fine bloom. 
This subject is discussed elsewhere in this work. 

Duhamel de Monceau (Traite Arb. Arbust. 1. 362, 1755) tells us that the Lilac 
was occasionally clipped in ball shape: "On les taille au ciseau ou au croissant 
pour en former des palissades ou des boules." Clipped Lilac hedges are not un- 
common but if kept in perfect hedge shape the bloom is necessarily impaired; 
undipped, they offer an excellent dense protection and at the flowering season are 
a great asset. In England we frequently see it used in conjunction with other shrubs 
as a hedge plant; Loudon (Arb. Brit. 11. 12 10, 1838) notes: "Mixed with sweet 
briars, sloe thorns, scarlet thorns, Guelder rose trees etc., it forms beautiful hedges 
to cottage gardens where there is plenty of room." While visiting the Central 
Experimental Farm at Ottawa, Canada, in June, 1927, I saw the collection of 
hedges grown for demonstration purposes. Among them is one of S. vulgaris 
but this is not so handsome as one of S. Josikaea. See 5. Josikaea. See also 
Meller (Gard. Mag. xi. 20, fig., 1910) and Heath (Tree Lore, 158, 1912). 

W. Ingram (Garden, vn. 437, 1875) tells of grafting the Lilac upon an old 
established hedge of Privet with what he considered to be excellent results. 

E. Soland (Jardin, x. 159, 1896) advocates the grafting and budding of new 
sorts of Lilac upon old plants in order to retain good specimens and still possess 
the best new forms. 

There grows against the Chateau de Crest at Jussy on Lake Geneva, Switzer- 
land, a specimen of S. vulgaris which has been trained as an espalier. Mr. Guillaume 
Fatio of Geneva very kindly forwarded the following information in regard to this ' 
plant, in a letter of July 1, 1924: "La tradition dit qu'il a 6t& plante par Jacques 
Barthelemy Micheli, qui vivait de 1690 a, 1766, qui cr6a le jardin en terasses tel qu'il 
subsiste encore aujourd'hui. Cette plante etait nouvelle a l'epoque et on la con- 
siderait comme delicate, c'est pourquoi on l'a plantee en espalier." Madame Micheli- 
Ador, the present owner of the Chateau de Crest, also kindly wrote on July 17, 



232 THE LILAC 

1924: "Le plus gros pied mesure 1 metre de circonference a la base du tronc. II va 
sans dire que pour garnir toute la facade de la maison il y a un grand nombre de 
pieds, et de ramifications. La fleur est plutot petite, lilas pale, en grosses grappes. 
Je n'ai aucune idee de l'age de cet arbre; je le crois extremement ancien." A figure 
of this plant appeared in "Le Jardin" (ix. 138, fig. 93, 1895) and shows the greater 
part of one side of a three-storied house covered with the plant. This is, so far as 
I know, the only noteworthy example of an espalier Lilac. 

In Europe the Common Lilac grown as a standard, or in tree form, is more 
often seen than in America, and is presumably more popular; an illustration, 
accompanying Mr. Rehder's article (Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xrv. 205, 
1899) shows a fine example of a plant so trained. See also Thatcher in "Horti- 
culture" (xi. 331, fig., 1910) and "Revue Horticole" (1906, figs. 131, 132). 

It is not unusual to find the Common Lilac flowering at an abnormal time of 
the year; references to such an occurrence are found as follows: Jour. Hort. Pratique 
Belgique, xn. 223 (1854-1855). — Barral in Rev. Hort. 1859, 589. — Ferlet in 
Rev. Hort. 1863, 436. — Carriere in Rev. Hort. 1872, 383. — Carriere and Andre in 
Rev. Hort. 1883, 530. — Blanchard in Rev. Hort. 1894, 523. — Jardin, xn. 275 
(1898); xvii. 338 (1903); xvni. 3, 366 (1904). 

Many references to abnormalities in bloom have been noted, among them such 
a one as is described by L. Henry (Rev. Hort. 1904, 277, fig. 116) where a flower 
panicle appeared directly from old wood and not, as normally, from wood of the 
previous year. Under the form of the Common Lilac, Chamaethyrus, reference is 
made to flower-clusters appearing on suckers directly from the ground. Carriere 
and Andre (Rev. Hort. 1883, 266) quote a letter from a correspondent who stated 
that a Lilac which had previously produced single flowers began one year to show 
a few double flowers and the second year all double flowers. There is of course a 
certain amount of doubt possible in regard to the accuracy of this statement. 

For other references dealing with teratology of the Lilac see A. Rehder, "The 
Bradley Bibliography," 1. 142 (1911), 11. 714-716 (1912). Also M. T. Masters, 
Vegetable Teratology" (1869) and O. Penzig, "Pflanzen-Teratology" (1894). 

The Lilac's winter buds have been studied by such writers as Fant (1872), 
Bosemann (1884), Shirasawa (1895), Schneider (1903), Ward (1904) and Trelease 
(1918). See also Asa Gray's "Elements of Botany" (revised ed., 29, figs. 75, 76). 

The seedling plant of S. vulgaris is illustrated in the "Germination studies of 
some trees and shrubs" (L. H. Pammel and C. M. King in Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci. 
xxx. 291, fig. 9, 1923). In his "Die vegetative Verzweigung der hoheren Gewachse" 
Ludwig Koch (Jahrb. Wissensch. Bot. xxv. 385, 1893, illustrated) enters, in great 
detail, into the anatomy and morphology of this species. For other references to 
literature of a similar character see A. Rehder, "The Bradley Bibliography," 1. 115 
(morphology and anatomy; flower), 122 (morphology and anatomy; embryology) 
(1911); in. 714-716 (191 2). For references to articles dealing with the physiology 
of the Lilac see the same work: 1. 150 (physiology; turgidity), 170 (physiology; 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 233 

metabolic processes), 182 (physiology; perfumes), 220 (ecology; phenology), 231 
(ecology; temperature) (191 1); n. 714-716 (191 2). 

A. Dupuis and O. Reveil in their "Flore Medicale" (n. 238, O. Reveil and others, 
Regne Vegetale, 1864-18 71) when discussing the Lilac give an account of its 
"Composition chimique" as follows: "Toutes les parties du lilas sont d'une amer- 
tume tres-prononcee. MM. Petroz et Robinet, qui ont analyse les fruits, y ont 
trouve une matiere resineuse, une substance sucree, une autre amere, une matiere 
qui precipite les sels de fer en gris, une espece de gomme se rapprochant de la bas- 
sorine, de l'acide malique, du malate acide de chaux, du nitrate de potasse, et 
d'autres sels; plus, une matiere incristallisable, que Ton trouve surtout dans l'ecorce, 
les bourgeons et les feuilles, qui a ete nominee syringine. Ce sont des aiguilles 
radiees, solubles dans dix parties d'eau, et dans l'alcool, insolubles dans Tether. 
Leur saveur est amere, douceatre, nauseabonde et astringente. Elles sont solubles 
dans l'acide sulfurique concentre avec une coloration jaune verdatre, qui vire au 
vert violace. La dissolution, etendue d'eau, presente une couleur amethyste. 
Les fleurs du lilas, tres-odorantes, sont employees en parfumerie, ou on extrait 
l'arome par les huiles fixes tres-fines par un procede analogue a celui que l'on 
emploie pour la tubereuse et le jasmin, et qui porte le nom d'enfleurage. Un chimiste 
allemand, nomine Weismann, a cependant obtenu, par distillation, de cinq cents 
grammes de fleurs de lilas, quatre grammes d'une huile essentielle d'une odeur 
tres-suave, analogue a celle du bois de Rhodes." They also write of the usages 
of the Lilac: "Les feuilles de lilas sont tres-ameres; les cantharides les mangent avec 
avidite. C'est, en effet, sur ces arbres qu'on les trouve le plus souvent. Le bois 
est dur, d'un grain fin, susceptible de prendre un beau poli, et pourrait servir pour 
faire des ouvrages de tour. A defaut de jasmin, les Turcs emploient les jeunes 
pousses du lilas pour faire des tuyaux de pipe. Sans un travail que M. le professeur 
Cruveilhier, alors medecin a Limoges, publia en 1822, sur l'emploi de l'extrait des 
fruits de lilas contre les fievres intermittentes, le lilas n'aurait peut-etre jamais ete 
employe 1 en medecine. On l'a considere comme un tonique amer propre a combattre 
les affections astheniques; mais, malgre l'eloge qu'en fit en 1853, M. le docteur 
Clement de Vallenoy (Cher), le lilas est aujourd'hui tout a fait abandonne, depuis 
surtout que la societe de medecine de Bordeaux a declare que ses proprietes febri- 
fuges etaient nulles, En Russie, on prepare par maceration des fleurs, pratiquee 
au soleil, une huile de lilas, qui est tres-vantee contre le rhumatisme articidaire" 
As noted under S. Josikaea the peasant was accustomed to use the Lilac medici- 
nally. Information in regard to the uses of the bark and wood of the Lilac may 
also be found in Dr. Hegi's recent work. For other references dealing with the eco- 
nomic uses of the Lilac see A. Rehder, "The Bradley Bibliography," in. 681 (1915). 
A correspondent of "The Gardeners' Chronicle" is quoted in the "Revue Horti- 
cole" (1849, 4*7) as recommending the use of the Lilac wood for staking peas; 
he notes that such stakes last a great number of years while those of other woods 
known to him last but one or two. 



234 THE LILAC 

Interesting information in regard to the fertilization of the Lilac by insects is 
contained in Hermann Muller's "The Fertilisation of Flowers" (translated by 
D'A. W. Thompson, 392, 1883). See also G. Hegi (111. Fl. Mittel-Eur., 1. a). 

The attempt has been made by Miss Isabella Preston, producer of the 5. 
Prestoniae hybrids, to cross S. vulgaris ( § ) with 5. pubescens ( 6 ). In June 1927, 
an examination of the plants raised showed no evidence of S. pubescens parentage. 
Miss Preston also crossed S. villosa ( 9 ) with S. vulgaris ( 6 ). Here again no trace 
of the pollen parent could be found. I know of no successful cross, such as was here 
attempted, between Lilacs of the two groups Villosae and Vulgares. 

Mr. F. L. Skinner of Dropmore, Manitoba, Canada, has attempted to cross 
S. vulgaris and S. pubescens (see S. pubescens), S. vulgaris and S. Komarowi, 
which he calls 5. Sargenti (see S. Komarowi), as well as S. vulgaris and S. oblata 
var. dilatata (see S. oblata var. dilatata, and S. hyacinthiflora) . 

Two color varieties of the Common Lilac follow. The first is: 

Syringa vulgaris var. alba Weston, Bot. Univ. 1. 289 (1770). — Aiton, Hort. Kew. 1. 
15 (1789). — Noisette, Man. Compl. Jard. in. 410 (1826). — Sweet, Hort. Brit. 272 
(1827). —A. Dietrich, Sp. PI. 1. 247 (1831). — G. Don, Gen. Syst. iv. 51 (1838). —Lou- 
don, Arb. Brit. 11. 1208 (1838). — De Candolle, Prodr. vm. 282 (1844). — Kirchner in 
Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 494 (1864), as a form. — Hartwig and Rumpler, 
Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 559 (1875). — Lavallee, Arb. Segrez. 169 (1877). — Lauche, 
Deutsch. Dendr. 170 (1880). — Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. 111. 537 (1887). — Dippel, 
Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 112 (1889). — Mouillefert, Traite Arb. Arbris. 11. 998 (1892-1898). — 
Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896), as a form. — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. 
Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 206 (1899); in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3301 (1917); Man. Cult. 
Trees and Shrubs, 756 (1927). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 
413 (1903), as a form. — Schneider, 111. Handb. Laubholzk. n. 774 (1911). — Lingelsheim 
in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 89 (1920), as a form. 

Syringa vulgaris /3 Zinn, Cat. PI. Gotting. 275 (1757). — Duroi, Harbk. Baumz. 11. 445 
(1772). — Leers, Fl. Herborn. 2 (1775). — Leysser, Fl. Halensis, 2 (1783). — Willde- 
now, Fl. Berol. 7 (1787). — Baumgarten, Fl. Lips. 5 (1790). — Mertens and Koch, 
Rohling's Deutschl. Fl. 1. 301 (1823). — Thuillier, Fl. Envir. Paris, 5 (1824) (re- 
print of ed. 2, 1799). — Pasquale, Cat. Orto Bot. Napoli, 100 (1867). 

Lilac vulgaris /S Lamarck, Encycl. Meth. 111. 512 (1789). — Dumont de Courset, Bot. 
Cult. 1. 709 (1802). — Mirbel in Nouv. Duhamel, 11. 206 (1804). — Lamarck and 
De Candolle, Fl. Francaise, in. 495 (1805). 

Liliacum alba Renault, Fl. Dept. Orne, 100 (1804). 

Siringa vulgaris flore albo Thiriart, Cat. PI. Arbust. Jard. Bot. Cologne, ser. 3, 1 (1806). 

Syringa albiflora Opiz, Naturalientausch, no. x. 239 (1825). 

Syringa vulgaris var. S. albiflora Bluff and Fingerhuth, Fl. Germ. 1. 11 (1825). 

Syringa cordifolia 7 alba Stokes, Bot. Commentaries, 32 (1830). 

Syringa vulgaris var. 5*. alba Reichenbach, Fl. Germ. Excurs. 1. 433 (1830). 

Syringa vulgaris Plee, Types, t. 117 (1844-1864), text in part. 

L[ilac] vulgaris var. alba Jacques and Herincq, Man. Gen. PI. m. 54 (1847-1857). 

Lilacum album Renault according to K. Koch, Dendr. 11. pt. 1. 266 (1872), as a synonym. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 235 

Syr[inga] alba Dietrich according to Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. I. 112 (1889), as a 

synonym. 
Pre-Linnean synonyms: 

Syringa flore cinerei coloris Besler, Hort. Eystett. I. 1, t. in. (1613) (t. as Syringa flore 

lacteo). 
Syringa fl. lacteo Bauhin, Pinax, 398 (1623). — Heucher, Novi Prov. Hort. Med. Acad. 

Vitemberg. 8 (1711). 
Syringa flore lacteo sive argenteo Parkinson, Paradisi, 408 (1629). — 'Sutherland, Hort. 

Med. Edinburg. 328 (1683). — Plukenet, Opera Omnia Bot. iv. Almagest. Bot. 

359 (1696). 
Lilac sive Syringa flore lacteo sive argenteo Parkinson, Theatr. Bot. 1468 (1640). 
Syringa caerulea flore albo Joncquet, Hort. 125 (1659). — Morison, Hort. Reg. Blesensis, 

199 (1669). 
Syringa Arabum flore albo Munting, Waare Oeffening PI. 122 (1672); Naauwkeurige 

Beschr. Aardgew. 162 (1696). 
Syringha lactea, seu floris colore quasi argenteo Hermann, Hort. Acad. Lugduno-Bat. 586 

(1687). 
Syringa flore quasi argenteo Commelin, Cat. PI. Hort. Med. Amstelod. 340 (1689). 
Lilac flore albo Tournefort, Elemens Bot. 1. 474 (1694); Instit. ed. 2, 1. 601 (1700); Hist. 

PI. 11. 81 (1732) (translated by J. Martyn). — Magnol, Hort. Reg. Monspel. 118 

(1697). — Boerhaave, Index Alter PI. pt. 2, 221 (1720). — Vaillant, Bot. Paris. 116 

(1727). — P. Miller, Cat. PI. 45 (1730); Gard. Diet. (1731). — Duhamel, Traite" 

Arb. Arbust. 1. 361 (1755). — Poiteau and Turpin, Fl. Paris, 7 (1808). 
Syringa; lactea Boerhaave, Index PI. 252 (171 o). 
Syringa major, flore albo Buxbaum, Enum. PI. Hallensi, 314 (1721). — Ruppius, Fl. 

Jenens. 24 (1745). 
Syringa flore lacteo sive argenteo Lilac Bradley, Diet. Bot. (1728). 
Syringa foliis lanceolato-cordatis a Linnaeus, Hort. Cliff. 6 (1737). 
Syringa flore candido Weinmann, Phyt. Icon. iv. 392, t. 958, fig. c (1745); Taalryck Reg. 

Plaat. Fig. (Dutch title page is Duidelyke Vertooning), vin. 453, t. 958, fig. c (1748), 

in part, as to synonym Queue de Renard and as to t. 
Syringa foliis ovato cordatis /S Linnaeus, Hort. Upsal. 1. 6 (1748). 
Syringa a., flore albo Dalibard, Fl. Paris, 2 (1749). 

Differs from the type Syringa vulgaris in the color of the flowers which are white, 
in the brighter green color of its winter-buds and of its foliage; as well as in its 
more slender and taller habit. 

Known only as a cultivated plant. 

This white variety, which is the first recorded variation from the type Syringa 
vulgaris, is mentioned by the German botanist Basil Besler in 161 3 or about fifty 
years after the Common Lilac was first introduced into Europe; he calls it in the 
text Syringa flore cinerei coloris with vernacular name of Ascherfarber Spanischer 
Syringsbaum. Under the name Syringa flore lacteo he gives a most excellent 
engraving of the flower-cluster; curiously, so far as I know, although there are many 
pictures of improved white forms, this illustration and Weinmann's colored plates 
are the only ones of this white variety and they are presumably close to the original 
type. 



236 THE LILAC 

Gaspard Bauhin, a French botanist and anatomist, who in 1623 next mentions 
this variety as Syringa fl. lacteo, writes that the type Syringa vulgaris, which 
he calls Syringa caerulea, differs in the color of its flowers, which, ordinarily blue, 
are "aliquando cinereus & quasi argenteus." 

Parkinson, in 1629, calls it Syringa flore lacteo sive argenteo or Silver coloured 
Pipe tree and states that both it and the Cut leaved Persian Lilac "are strangers 
with us as yet"; he writes: "This Pipe tree differeth not from the former blew Pipe 
tree, either in stemme or branches, either in leaves or flowers or manner of growing, 
but onely in the colour of the flower, which in this is of a milke or silver colour, 
which is a kinde of white, wherein is a thinne wash, or light shew of blew shed 
therein, comming somewhat neare unto an ash-colour." 

It is apparent that the first white Lilacs in cultivation were not the pure white 
color now associated with this variety. 

Although frequently mentioned in pre-Linnean literature nothing further of 
interest in regard to this plant is recorded for another hundred years. During that 
time the variety had become better known for Philip Miller in "The Gardeners 
Dictionary" of 1731 notes that both it and the blue [ = S. vulgaris] "are more 
common than" the purple [ = S. vulgaris var. purpurea]; this latter had been first 
mentioned by Sutherland in 1683. 

The adjective alba was first used as a part of the name of this variety by Joncquet 
in 1659 who calls it Syringa caerulea flore albo. After 1770 the combination S. 
vulgaris var. alba, first known to have been used by Weston, was very generally 
adopted. He merely describes it as "Syringa, fol. ovato-cordatis, flore albo." 
Duhamel de Monceau (Traite Arb. Arbust. 1. 361, 1775) still retained this variety 
as a species and called it by Tournefort's name Lilac flore albo with common name 
of Lilas des bois a fleur blanche. Poiteau and Turpin (Fl. Paris. 7, 1808) also 
continue to refer to it as Lilac flore albo. The German botanist Johann Philipp 
Duroi in 1772 gives it the common name of Weisser Spanischer Hollunder and 
says that it is distinguished from S. vulgaris by the color of its flowers and by other 
characters such as a more upright habit, brighter green foliage and a brighter 
gray bark. 

It is not known where this variety originated but it is probable, from the first 
references, that it was on the continent, in Germany, or France. Lochot (Rev. 
Hort. 1903, 128) who had seen the Common Lilac growing spontaneously in the 
Balkan Mountains, states that although he has never seen it, he is told that the 
white variety occurs there also. While this is entirely possible yet so far as I have 
been able to learn there is no proof that it exists except as a garden plant. 

There was considerable confusion in regard to the Mock-Orange or Philadelphus 
coronarius Linnaeus, at one time called by Cesalpinus (1583) Siringa, by Doedens 
(1583) Syringa, by Tabernaemontanus (1 588-1 591), Gerard (1597) and others 
Syringa alba, and this white variety of S. vulgaris. Curtis (Bot. Mag. vi. t. 183, 
1792) states that both the blue and white sorts of the Common Lilac were de- 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 237 

scribed by Gerard and Parkinson. Parkinson (1629) does mention the white 
variety as already noted, but Gerard in "The Herball" of 1597 both in his figure 
(no. 1) of Syringa alba and in his text, is discussing the Philadelphus and not the 
white Lilac. And Gerard's description of the too strong fragrance of the plant, 
a section of the text which Curtis quotes, is written of the Mock-Orange and not 
of the Lilac. Both editions of the "Hortus Kewensis," of 1789 and 1810, make 
the same error, stating that this white variety was cultivated in 1597 by Mr. 
John Gerard. These editions however mention his figure no. 2 which is entitled 
Syringa caerulea [=S. vulgaris] rather than the figure no. 1 mentioned by Curtis- 
There is no justification for so doing, however, either according to the title on this 
figure, or to what is contained in the text. Bauhin in his "Pinax," published in 
1623, distinguishes between this Syringa alba of Gerard's figure, or Philadelphus, and 
the white Lilac which he calls Syringa fl[ore] lacteo. To this day the Mock-Orange 
or Philadelphus is frequently called by the common name Syringa. 

Munting (Waare Oeffening PI. 122, 1672) is confused in regard to these two 
genera. He mentions four Syringa: (1) Syringa Arabum flore coeruleo which he 
calls "Syringe van d'Arabiers met een blaauwe Bloeme, die 00k Lillach genoemt 
wordt"; (2) "Syringa Arabum flore albo, Arabische Syringe met witte Bloemen"; (3) 
"Syringa flore candido simplici, Syringe met een witte enkelde Bloeme en kleinder 
bladeren;" and (4) "Syringa flore candido pleno, ofte Syringe met een witte dubbelde 
Bloeme." Only the first two of these refer to the Lilac, the last two, as I have noted 
under the form of the Common Lilac Azurea plena, referring to the Philadelphus. 

Weinmann's Syringa flore candido should, so far as the text is concerned, be 
referred to the Philadelphus. The synonym Queue de Renard however is used for 
the Lilac and not for the Philadelphus. Weinmann notes that his plant is figured 
on Plate 954, fig. a, but this refers us to an Oak, while on Plate 958, fig. c, we find 
a picture of a white Lilac with the title Syringa flore candido, Queue de Renard, 
Syring-baum." 

Opiz in 1825 describes his S. albiflora as having ovate-cordate, very glabrous 
leaves, the lower branches of the panicle one-flowered, the corolla glabrous, the 
corolla-lobes obtuse, the anthers inserted above the middle of the corolla-tube, 
the style very short. According to the description this is merely the white-flowered 
variety of the Common Lilac. 

Dippel in 1889 cites Syr[inga] alba Dietrich (Sp. PI. 1. 247 [1831]) as a synonym 
of S. vulgaris var. alba. This is an error for the name appears as S. vulgaris y alba. 

The name of Common White Lilac is now very generally used by nurserymen 
and others to designate any unnamed single white Lilac but there is little reason 
to suppose that any of the plants of the original type, strictly speaking, are now 
in existence. S. vulgaris var. alba may however be considered as the starting point 
whence originated many named garden forms. Somewhat over one hundred years 
after Besler's plant is noted the first two of these are recorded in the "Catalogus 
Plantarum," published in 1730 and compiled by Philip Miller; this is a list of all 



238 THE LILAC 

"Trees, Shrubs, Plants and Flowers, both exotic and domestic, which are propa- 
gated for sale in the gardens near London"; these forms had variegated leaves and 
appeared as species and as names only, — as Lilac; fiore albo,foliis ex luteo variegatis 
or Yellow-blotch'd Lilac, and as Lilac; flore albo, foliis ex albo variegatis or White- 
blotch'd Lilac. These are the only two forms of the Common White Lilac which 
I have found appearing in pre-Linnean literature. They are again found in Weston's 
"Botanicus Universalis" of 1770 as S. vulgaris alba 2. luteo-varieg[ata] or Yellow- 
bloatched-leaved white Lilac and as S. vulgaris alba 3. albo-varieg[ata] or White- 
bloatched-leaved white Lilac. Miller (Gard. Diet. 1731) writes of these forms: 
"The two variegated Sorts are preserved by some Persons, who delight in strip'd 
Plants, as Curiosities, but they have no Beauty in them; for in the Summer-time 
when these Plants are free of Growth, their white and yellow Blotches do not appear 
very plain; and when they do, it appears more like a distemper in them, than any 
real Beauty." Mirbel (Nouv. Duhamel, 11. 207, 1804) evidently felt the same way 
about variegated foliage for he writes: "quelques personnes les recherchent, mais 
comme ces accidents ne proviennent que de foiblesse, ces vegelaux en reprenant 
leur vigueur reprenent leur verdure uniforme." 

In Loddiges' catalogue of 1823 appears a double-flowered white form, 5. vulgaris 
alba pleno. This does not appear in his later catalogues of 1826 and 1836. Of 
this, growing in the garden of the Horticultural Society, London, Loudon writes 
in 1838 that the flowers are single. Noisette's "Manuel" of 1826 lists a double 
white form as S. vulgaris var. alba plena which is possibly the Lilac referred to in 
later years as Noisettiana alba, although that may have been a single white since 
Noisette lists both single and double. 

Other named white forms which appeared at about this time are Alba grandi- 
flora, Alba virginalis, and Pyramidalis alba. Plants which I have examined bearing 
these names and which were once considered sufficiently remarkable to deserve a 
qualifying name distinguishing them from the type S. vulgaris var. alba, do not 
show any marked differences the one from the other, nor do they appear in any way 
superior to the Common White Lilac as now sold. More distinct and showier are 
such recent white forms as the doubles, Mont Blanc and Edith Cavell, and the 
handsome singles, Vestale and Jeanne d'Arc. Forms of excellent habit and which 
may be depended upon to bloom with regularity, having stood the test of time, are 
the double Mme. Lemoine and the single Marie Legraye. In many cases selection 
and breeding while increasing the size of the individual flower and of the cluster, 
has modified the fragrance, and for many destroyed some of the charm associated 
with the old simple "Common White Lilac." 

There is considerable difference between S. vulgaris and its white variety which 
is as a rule of a taller, more slender and more upright habit, and which shows less 
tendency to produce suckers. In winter both it and its improved forms may be 
distinguished from the Lilacs with colored flowers by the buds which are a character- 
istic yellow-green (Pyrite Yellow tinged with Warbler Green (rv.)) ; in the forms with 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 239 

colored flowers these buds are a somewhat purplish color (Diamine Brown (xin.)) 
tinged to a greater or lesser degree with green (Warbler Green (rv.)). The foliage 
too of the white Lilac is a yellower green than that of Lilacs with colored flowers, 
a characteristic frequently found in albinism; the bark is somewhat paler also. 
Rehder (Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit., 1. c.) states that this white variety blooms 
earlier than the type S. vulgaris but I have noticed no marked difference in this 
regard and believe it to be a matter of the individual form or of the situation. 

In the "Hortus Collinsonianus," printed in 1843 with a preface by L. W. Dillwyn, 
which is an "account of the plants cultivated by the late Peter Collinson, Esq., 
F. R. S." appears testimony to the popularity of this variety. In a memorandum, 
evidently written by Collinson himself, it is stated: "Lord Petre [a friend of Collin- 
son's] was particularly fond of the White Lilac, and directed his gardener to gather 
none but the white seed; he raised more than five thousand plants that flowered in 
1 741, and out of that number about twenty came white, the rest all blue, so that 
white seems to be only a seminal variety from the blue." 

In the earliest English catalogues to which I have had access this white variety 
appears as follows: as The white Lilac (Burchell, 1764, 20); as Syringa, Lilac 
1. White (Shiells, 1773, 11); as S. vulgaris alba (Mackie, 1812, 54; Fulham Nursery, 
[cir. 1817], 26; Backhouse, 1816, 45; Loddiges, 1820, 39; 1823, 35; 1826, 59; 1836, 67; 
Colvill, 1821, 30; Miller (Bristol Nursery), 1826, 14); as White Lilac, S. vulgaris 
(Warren, 1844, 20). 

It appears as Syringa vulgaris flore albo in the catalogue of Wiegers (1809, 119) 
of Malines, Belgium, and in French catalogues of early date as follows: as S. vul- 
garis b. alba (Audibert, 1817, 23; 1831-1832, 51; Oudin, 1841, 22; A. Leroy, 1851, 
47); as S. vulgaris flore albo (Baumann, 1838-1839, 8); as Lilas blanc (Oudin, 1839- 
1840, 1); as Lilas a fleurs blanc pur (Oudin, 1845-1846, 6); as Lilas commun a 
fleurs blanches (Seneclauze, 1846-1847, 11). 

Its date of introduction to the United States is uncertain but it is probable 
that, with the Common Lilac, it was brought over by the early settlers and soon 
became established as part of our country landscape, although it was probably 
never so much planted as the colored type. As well as S. vulgaris, this white variety 
was cultivated in the Elgin Botanic Garden, established near the city of New York 
in 1801 (D. Hosack, Hort. Elginensis, 181 1). It is listed as follows in nursery 
catalogues: as Syringa var. fl. albo (Cat. Bartram Bot. Gard. 1814, 44); as S. vul- 
garis, White Lilac (William Prince, 1823, 42; 1831, 55; William R. Prince, 1841- 
1842, 40; Ellwanger and Barry, 1845-1846, 26; Parsons, 1846, 38); as 5. vulgaris 
v[ar]. alba (Landreth, 1824, 27; Parsons, [cir. 1842], 2; Winter, 1843, 44, 62; Hovey 
1846-1847, 11 j Ellwanger and Barry, 1855-1856, 9). 

The second color variety of the Common Lilac is: 

Syringa vulgaris var. purpurea Weston, Bot. Univ. 1. 289 (1770). — Schmidt, Oesterr, 
Baumz. 11. 25, t. 77 (1794). — Noisette, Man. Comp. Jard. 111. 410 (1826). — Sweet. 



240 THE LILAC 

Hort. Brit. 272 (1827). — De Candolle, Prodr. vm. 282 (1844), excluding synonym Lilac 
media. — Bon Jard. 783 (1850). — Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 
296 (1864), as a form. — Regel, Russ. Dendr. 206 (1870). — Lavailee, Arb. Segrez. 169 
(1877), excluding synonym Lilac media. — Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. in. 537 (1887). — 
Mouillefert, Traite Arb. Arbris. 11. 998 (1892-1898). — Render in Moller's Deutsch. 
Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 206 (1899); Man. Cult. Trees and Shrubs, 756 (1927). — Beissner, 
Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903), as a form. — Lingelsheim in 
Engler Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 89 (1920), as a form. 

Syringa vulgaris c. Duroi, Harbk. Baumz. 11. 446 (1772). 

Syringa vulgaris /? violacea Aiton, Hort. Kew. 1. 15 (1789). — W. T. Aiton, Hort. Kew. 
ed. 2, 1. 23 (1810). — Sweet, Hort. Brit. 272 (1827). — A. Dietrich, Sp. PI. 1. 247 
(1831). — G. Don, Gen. Syst. iv. 51 (1838). — Loudon, Arb. Brit. 11. 1209 (1838). — 
De Candolle, Prodr. vm. 282 (1844). — Regel, Russ. Dendr. 206 (1870). — Lavallee, 
Arb. Segrez. 168 (1877). — Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. m. 537 (1887). — Mouille- 
fert, Traite Arb. Arbris. 11. 998 (1892-1898). — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.- 
Zeit. xrv. 206 (1899); in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3301 (1917); Man. Cult. 
Trees and Shrubs, 756 (1927). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz- 
Ben. 413 (1903), as a form. — Schneider, 111. Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 774 (1911). — 
Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 89 (1920), as a form. 

L[ilac] vulgaris var. 1 Dumont de Courset, Bot. Cult. 1. 709 (1802). 

L[ilac] vulgaris var. 2 Dumont de Courset, Bot. Cult. 1. 709 (1802). 

Syringa media H[ort.] P[arisiensis] according to Mirbel, in Nouv. Duhamel, n. 207 (1804), 
as a synonym of Lilac vulgaris var., 'le lilas pourpre,' not Lilac media Dumont de 
Courset. — Noisette, Man. Comp. Jard. m. 411 (1826). 

Siringa vulgaris flore purpureo Thiriart, Cat. PI. Arbust. Jard. Bot. Cologne, ser. 3, 1 (1806). 

Lilac vulgaris var. B. Poiteau and Turpin, Fl. Paris. 7, t. v. (1808), as the name of Lilas 
de Marly, not Lilac de Marli Dumont de Courset, and as the name of Lilas d'Ecosse 
(t. v. as Lilac vulgaris, Lilas de Marly).* — Bon Jard. 1836, 597. — Spach, Hist. Nat. 
Veg. vm. 283 (1839). — Bosse, Handb. Blumengartn. m. 462 (1842). 

Syringa vulgaris a lilacina Sweet, Hort. Brit. 272 (1827). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, 
Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903), as a form. — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. 
iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 89 (1920), as a form. 

Syringa cordifolia /3 purpurascens Stokes, Bot. Commentaries, 32 (1830). 

Syringa vulgaris rubra Loddiges, Cat. 1836, 67, name only. — Loudon, Arb. Brit. 11. 
1209 (1838). — Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 496 (1864), as a 
form. — Hartwig and Riimpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 559 (1875). — Beissner, 
Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903), as a form. — Schneider, 111. 
Handb. Laubholzk. 11. 774 (1911). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 
3301 (1917). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 89 (1920), as a 
form. 

Syringa vulgaris rubra major Loddiges, Cat. 1836, 67, name only. — Loudon, Arb. Brit. 
11. 1209 (1838). — Bosse, Handb. Blumengartn. m. 461 (1842), as S. vulgaris flore 
rubro major. — Jager, Ziergeholze, 530 (1865), as S. vulgaris var. fl. rubro major. — 
W. Miller, Diet. Engl. Names PI. 77 (1884). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. 
Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903), as a form. — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, 
pt. i-n. 89 (1920), as a form. 

* In the references following that of Poiteau and Turpin the name appears as Lilas de Marly. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 241 

Syringa vulgaris var. grandiflora Hort. according to Bosse, Handb. Blumengartn. in. 

461 (1842), as a synonym. — Jager, Ziergeholze, 530 (1865), as a synonym. 
L[ilac] vulgaris var. purpurea Jacques and Herincq, Man. Gen. PL in. 54 (1847-1857), 

excluding synonym Lilac media Dumont de Courset. 
L[ilac] vulgaris var. violacea Jacques and Herincq, Man. Gen. PL in. 54 (1847-1857). 
S[yringa] v[ulgaris] Marlyensis Hort. according to Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, 

Arb. Muscav. 495 (1864), as a form. — Hartwig and Riimpler, Vilmorin's Blumen- 
gartn. 559 (1875), as var - — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896). — Render 

in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3301 (1917), as var. — Spath-Buch, 223 (1920), as 

S. vulgaris marliensis Hort. 
S\yringa] de Marly rouge Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 495 (1864), 

as a synonym. 
S\yringa] Marliensis Hort. according to K. Koch, Dendr. n. pt. 1. 266 (1872), excluding 

synonym Lilac media Dumont de Courset. — Lauche, Deutsch. Dendr. 170 (1880), 

as S. marlyensis Hort. 
Syringa vulgaris var. grandiflora purpurea De Jaubert, Invent. Cult. Trianon, 25 (1876). 
S\yringa] rubra Hort. according to Lavallee, Arb. Segrez. 169 (1877), as a synonym. 
Syringa vulgaris purpurea rubra Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885), name only. 
Syringa vulgaris violacea purpurea Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 79 (1885), name only. 
? Syringa vulgaris var. de Marly L. Henry, in Jardin, vni. 175 (1894). 
Syringa vulgaris purpurea Marlyensis Hort. according to Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, 

Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903), as a form. — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. 

rv. 243, pt. i-n. 89 (1920), as a form. 
Syringa vulgaris var. Rubra de Marley Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3298 

(191 7), as a synonym. 
Pre-Linnean synonyms: 

Syringa sive Lilac flore saturate purpureo Sutherland, Hort. Med. Edinburg. 328 

(1683). — Plukenet, Opera Omnia Bot. rv. Almagest. Bot. 359 (1698). 
Syringha purpurea Hermann, Hort. Acad. Lugduno-Bat. 586 (1687). 
Syringa flore purpureo Commelin, Cat. PL Hort. Med. 340 (1689). 
Lilac flore saturate purpureo Tournefort, Elemens Bot. 1. 474 (1694); Instit. ed. 2, 1. 

602 (1700); Hist. PL n. 81 (1732) (translated by J. Martyn). — Magnol, Hort. Reg. 

Monspel. 117 (1679). — Boerhaave, Index Alter PL pt. 2, 221 (1720). — Vaillant, 

Bot. Paris, 116 (1727). — Miller in Cat. PL 45 (1730); Gard. Diet. (1731); Fig. 

Beautif. PL n. 109, t. clxiii. (1760). — Duhamel de Monceau, Traite Arb. Arbust. 

1. 361 (1755). — Poiteau and Turpin, Fl. Paris. 7, t. v. (1808) (t. v. as Lilac vulgaris, 

Lilas de Marly). 
Syringa; purpurea Boerhaave, Index PL 23 (17 10). 
Syringa foliis lanceolatis, cordatis /3 Linnaeus, Hort. Cliff. 6 (1737). 

Differs from the type Syringa vulgaris Linnaeus in the darker color of its flowers. 
It is probable that this variety when first introduced had flowers not very different in 
color from those of the form Rouge de Trianon (no. 3008-1 Arn. Arb.). See Rouge de 
Trianon. 

Known only as a cultivated plant. 

The plant now known as Syringa vulgaris var. purpurea is first mentioned about 
one hundred and twenty-five years after the Common Lilac was introduced into 
Europe and about sixty years later than the white variety. It appears as a name 



242 THE LILAC 

only, as Syringa sive Lilac flore saturate purpureo, the deep purple Lilac, in James 
Sutherland's "Hortus Medicus Edinburgensis; or A Catalogue of the Plants in 
the Physical Garden at Edinburgh," published in 1683. It was because it is first 
recorded as growing in this garden that this variety received the common name 
of Scotch Lilac. Philip Miller (Fig. Beautif. PL n. 109, t. clxiii. 1760) writes: 
"As this is the First Book in which this particular Sort is mentioned so it has ob- 
tained the Name of Scotch Lilac, that Garden being the first in which it was here 
known." Earlier (Gard. Diet., 1731) Miller had noted that this variety was rarer 
than "the first and second sorts," — the Common Lilac and its white variety. In 
1768, in the eighth edition of this work, he writes: "This is the most beautiful 
of the three"; "whether this was raised from seeds, or which other way it was ob- 
tained I could never learn; but I take it to be a distinct species from the others"; 
further, "the purple or Scotch Lilac has its branches yet more diffused . . . those 
[the flowers] of the Scotch are larger, and the flowers are fairer than those of 
either of the other [sic], so make a much finer appearance . . . ." 

Weston who first uses the combination Syringa vulgaris var. purpurea merely 
describes the variety as Syringa, fol. ovato-cordatis, flore purpureo. 

William Aiton refers to no previous authority when he mentions for the first 
time Syringa vulgaris var. violacea. But W. T. Aiton in the second edition of the 
"Hortus Kewensis," of 1810, refers it to the plant figured as t. 183 by Curtis 
(Bot. Mag. vi. t. 183, 1792). Loudon, De Candolle and others also refer their 
S. vulgaris var. violacea to this figure of the "Botanical Magazine." This reference 
is somewhat obscure. Curtis, after mentioning the Lilacs with blue and white 
flowers, writes: "to these another sort is added by more modern writers, superior 
in beauty to the original, as producing larger bunches of flowers, of a brighter hue, 
having more of the purple tint, and hence called by some the purple Lilac." It is 
presumably to this sentence in the text that W. T. Aiton, Loudon, etc., refer their 
variety violacea, for the article nowhere mentions S. vulgaris var. violacea, nor 
does the plate bear any title and must be considered, except by inference, to be 
S. vulgaris, which is the plant described by Curtis. As a common name for S. 
vulgaris var. violacea, William Aiton, W. T. Aiton, Loudon, G. Don and others give 
Common Purple Lilac, showing by their use of the adjective purple that they refer 
to Curtis' text just cited; from this common name we may infer that this variety 
was considered identical with the purple Lilac mentioned earlier by Sutherland 
and by Miller. Loudon gives as another authority for his S. vulgaris var. violacea 
the plant figured as t. CLXin., Lilac flore saturate purpureo [which is based on Tourne- 
fort's plant of this name] in Miller's Icones already mentioned, and identifies it 
with the Scotch Lilac, proving conclusively that he considered the two varieties 
violacea and purpurea to be the same. Nicholson in 1887 identifies the Scotch 
Lilac with S. vulgaris var. violacea. He however mentions in addition the variety 
purpurea, and a considerable number of writers who came after Aiton have also 
failed to combine the two. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 243 

Mirbel (Nouv. Duhamel, n. 207, 1804), who calls the purple variety of the 
Common Lilac Syringa media, is not describing the same plant as Dumont de 
Courset whose Lilac media was evidently identical with the hybrid 6". chinensis. 
He writes: "Le Lilas pourpre (Syringa media H[ortus] Pjarisiensis]) tient le 
milieu pour la grandeur entre les deux autres [referring to his varieties, — one 
'a fleurs tirant sur le bleu,' the other 'a. fleurs blanches']; il est estime a cause 
de la couleur de ses fleurs, et a cause de ses panicules plus nombreuses, plus 
grandes, plus serrees. Ses branches sont etalees." Hortus Parisiensis is the old 
name for the Jardin des Plantes, Paris. Noisette too writes of this Lilac media 
which he also calls Lilas de Marly and considers to be a variety of S. vulgaris: 
". . . ses fleurs sont plus grandes, plus foncees, et forment un thyrse plus epais 
que le premier [the Common Lilac] dont elles ont l'odeur agreable." This change 
of classification of the Lilac media or Lilas de Marly which begins with Mirbel is 
also discussed under S. chinensis. 

Poiteau and Turpin in 1808 also identify the plant, which they say is known in 
France as Lilas de Marly, with the purple variety of S. vulgaris which they say is 
called in England Lilas d'Ecosse. "Le Bon Jardinier," which had earlier considered 
it to be a hybrid, in 1836 compares it to S. vulgaris thus: "Thyrses plus epais, 
fleurs plus grandes, violet pourpre; odeur aussi suave." Spach also notes: "La 
variete elite Lilas de Marly se fait remarquer par de thyrses plus denses, a fleurs 
plus grandes et d'un pourpre violet." It is possible that the Lilas de Marly, or 
purple variety of the Common Lilac, which Poiteau and Turpin write of as French, 
may have originated at the Chateau de Marly which was situated not far from 
Versailles. (See 5. chinensis). 

L. Henry (Jour. Soc. Hort. France, s6r. 4, n. 736, 1901) discusses the earlier 
and later classifications of the Lilas de Marly or Lilac media. Elsewhere (Jardin, 
vni. 175, 1894) he gives a description of this Lilac which he calls S. vulgaris var. 
de Marly: "Fleurs lilas blanc nuance^ rose, devenant bleuatres; boutons roses . . . ." 
It seems doubtful from this description whether he was discussing the plant usually 
described as Lilas de Marly which is commonly referred to as dark in tone. 

The Comte de Jaubert in his catalogue of the plants growing at the Trianon, 
published in 1876, gives as corresponding names for his S. vulgaris var. grandiflora 
-purpurea, Lilas de Marly and Lilas Charles X. It is probable that the form 
of the Common Lilac Charles X. approaches very closely to the Lilas de Marly, 
but since I have found no satisfactory evidence that the two were generally con- 
sidered to be the same I have kept it as a distinct form. 

The Lilac at present cultivated as Lilas de Marly, Marlyensis, Marly Flieder, 
etc., is certainly a variety of the Common Lilac and not a hybrid. Whether the 
early writers were wrong in their classification and the more recent ones correct, 
or whether the variety so cultivated originated as a result of confusion is un- 
certain but I do not believe that at this day it is separable from S. vulgaris 
var. purpurea. Writers such as Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, and Lingelsheim call 



244 THE LILAC 

it 5. vulgaris f. purpurea Marlyensis. H. L. Gerth van Wijk (Diet. PL Names, 
I. 1308, 191 1) gives as French name of 5. vulgaris var. purpurea, Lilas de Marly. 

Nor do I believe that the red form of the Marly Lilac is in any way distinct 
from the purple form. Loudon calls the S. vulgaris var. rubra major of Loddiges' 
catalogue of 1836 "the Lilas de Marly of French gardeners." W. Miller lists his 
plant of the same name without description with common name of Large-red- 
flowered-Lilac. Kirchner mentions the Syringa de Marly rouge as a synonym of 
S. vulgaris var. Marlyensis Hort., and Rehder in 191 7 gives 5. vulgaris var. Rubra 
de Marley as a synonym of S. vulgaris var. Marlyensis. Bosse in 1842 mentions as 
a synonym of S. vulgaris flore rubro major, which he also identifies with the Lilas 
de Marly, S. vulgaris grandijlora Hort. Jager gives grandiflora (Marly couge[sic], 
Marlyensis) as corresponding name for his S. vulgaris fl[ore] rubro major. 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv - und Curland, 24, 1883) lists a S. vulgaris f. 
purpurea hort., also called "Lilas Marly, rubra de Marly, rubra plena, triomphe de 
Marly, S. marlyensis hort., etc." He notes it as rarely planted but cultivated at 
Riga according to Buhse. The Lilac Rubra plena is undoubtedly a distinct form 
with double flowers. 

Color distinctions are difficult of interpretation. The presence of considerable 
red in a blue flower with some justifies the name purpurea with others the name 
rubra. I do not believe that the S. vulgaris rubra of Loddiges' catalogue of 1836 
can be separated from 5. vulgaris var. purpurea and treat it as a synonym. 
The fact that the Marly Lilac by some was considered to be red and by others 
purple confirms this opinion. Schneider questions whether the variety rubra may 
not be identified with the variety purpurea. 

William Miller (Diet. English Names Plants, 76, 1884) lists as distinct varieties 
of S. vulgaris, violacea or Common Purple or Scotch Lilac, rubra or Common Red- 
flowered Lilac and again violacea or Common Violet-flowered Lilac. 

Stokes' 5. cordifolia var. purpurascens is founded on the Lilac jlore saturate 
purpureo of Vaillant which in turn is referred to Tournefort's plant of that name. 

It is improbable that any of the plants now cultivated as S. vulgaris var. pur- 
purea, as violacea, rubra, Lilas de Marly and so on, can at this date be identified 
as corresponding to the original type of this variety. Nor are figures of any as- 
sistance since, even if colored, these show the work of too much imagination to 
be of value for purposes of identification. The flowers of no two plants which I 
have seen in this country of the Marly Lilac, for instance, are precisely the same 
but it is commonly grown and listed for sale by numerous nurseries. Cultivation 
alone, over such a period of years, would undoubtedly have modified the variety 
since first introduced, even were it possible to discount the errors incidental to 
repeated propagation. Nor can the history of any individual plant of this variety 
which I have seen be traced back for even so long a time as fifty years. 

[K. Koch] (Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. xn. 43, 1869) writes: 
"Schon seit langer Zeit kennt man die Abart mit weissen Bluthen; ausserdem 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 245 

wurde bereits vor 200 Jahren in einigen Garten von Edinburgh eine Abart mit 
dunkleren Bliithen kultivirt, die in England sehr beliebt gewesen zu sein scheint 
und wahrscheinlich dieselbe ist, welche etwas spater als Marly-Flieder (Syringa 
Marliensis), besonders in Versailles und dessen Anlagen, vor Allem in dem Garten 
zu Marly, viel kultivirt wurde. Von diesem Marly-Flieder ruhmte man fruher 
ausserdem noch, dass er reichlicher, gedrangter und etwas grosser bluhe. In 
spateren Zeiten kam er als Syringa purpurea und rubra major von Neuem in den 
Handel, audi ist er mit der naheren Bezeichnung violacea in den Miller'schen 
auserlesenen Pflanzen (auf der 163. Tafel) und in dem botanical Magazine (tabula 
183) abgebildet worden." This statement offers excellent confirmatory evidence 
of the classification here given. 

"Standardized Plant Names" has adopted as approved common name for 
these varieties, which they treat as distinct, the following: for S. vulgaris Marly- 
ensis, Marly; for S. vulgaris var. Rouge de Marly, Rubra de Marly, Red Marly; 
for S. vulgaris rubra, Common Red; for S. vulgaris var. violacea, Common Violet. 
According to my classification all these names, which I believe referable to S. 
vulgaris var. purpurea, should be dropped, and the approved common name of 
Common Purple adopted as inclusive of all. 

S. vulgaris var. purpurea should be considered, not an an individual plant, 
but as representing a group of Lilacs, variable in color and form of flower and 
cluster, but all darker than the group of which 5. vulgaris is the type. Among 
garden forms of the Common Lilac here listed are many belonging to this group. 

Some appeared early in the nineteenth century and bore the varietal name 
purpurea, with an additional qualifying name designating them as superior or 
distinct. Such were Purpurea grandiflora and Purpurea plena; others which belong 
in this group are Violacea plena, Rubra grandiflora, Rubra insignis, Rubra foliis 
variegatis, etc. Certain of these were undoubtedly used as corresponding names 
for such widely cultivated garden forms as Rouge de Trianon and Charles X., 
which, although in cultivation at the present time, appear to me to be, at this date, 
like the Marly Lilac, impossible to identify with any certainty. Other forms of 
this group but of more recent origin are the well-known German Lilac Andenken an 
Ludwig Spath, Lemoine's forms L'Oncle Tom, Marceau and Milton, the Belgian 
Lilac Mons. J. de Messemaeker, and many others. Of all Lilacs with dark flowers 
it may be said that they fade after they have been expanded for a short time and 
eventually become so pale as to be unrecognizable. 

5. vulgaris var. purpurea has been much used for forcing and, as the Lilas de 
Marly, is often mentioned in connection with the "white Lilac industry," since it, 
as well as certain other dark Lilacs, is said to turn a purer white than some of paler 
coloring. 

Carriere and Andre (Rev. Hort. 1893, 511) tell of an abnormally large number 
of flower clusters having been produced upon a plant of the Lilas de Marly after 
a dry season in 1893. 



246 THE LILAC 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv - und Curland, 24, 1883) under S. vulgaris lists 
as distinct forms: d. violacea hort., which he notes is the most frequent form and 
f. purpurea hort., cultivated at Riga according to Buhse. 

S. vulgaris var. purpurea is found listed in English nursery catalogues of early- 
date as follows: as The Scotch or purple Lilac (Burchell, 1764, 20); as Syringa, 
Lilac 4. Scotch (Shiells, 1773, n); as Syringa, Lilac 2. Purple (Shiells, 1773, 11); 
as S. vulgaris violacea or Purple Lilac (Mackie, 181 2, 54; Backhouse, 1816, 45; 
Colvill, 1821, 30); as S. vulgaris, Lilac, purple (Miller (Bristol Nursery), 1826, 14); 
as S. vulgaris purpurea (Loddiges, 1826, 59; 1836, 67). 

In French catalogues also: as S. vulgaris var. a fleur pourpre (Audibert, 181 7, 
23); as S. vulgaris var. a fleurs violet-bleuatre (Audibert, 181 7, 23); as S. vul- 
garis purpurea (Audibert, 1831-1832, 51; Oudin, 1841, 22); as 5. vulgaris flore 
rubro, Lilas de Marly (Baumann, 1838-1839, 8); as Lilas de Marly (Oudin, 1839- 
1840, 1; Dauvesse, no. 20, 24, 1855); as Lilas a fleur rouge (Oudin, 1845-1846, 6); 
as S. vulgaris rubra (Oudin, 1845-1846, 25) ; as Lilas a fleurs pourpres (Oudin, 1845- 
1846, 6) as Lilas commun de Marly (Seneclauze, 1846-1847, 11). 

In nursery catalogues of the United States we find it: as S. vulgaris purpurea 
or Purple Lilac (William Prince, 1823, 42); as S. vulgaris, blue or purple Lilac 
(Landreth, 1824, 27); as S. vulgaris rubra or Red Lilac (William Prince, 1829, 51); 
as S. rubra (William R. Prince, 1841-1842, 40); as 6 1 . purpurea or Blue or Purple 
Lilac (William R. Prince, 1841-1842, 40; Ellwanger and Barry, 1846-1847, 32). 

No single species of shrub has produced so many garden forms as has Syringa 
vulgaris, the Common Lilac. While often referred to as hybrids they are not such, 
since they show the influence of only one species; they are, however, in many cases 
the result of cross-pollination, natural or artificial, between garden forms; some- 
times they have been the result of selection, while again they have been propagated 
from sports. 

As is the case with some of the more recent garden forms of the Common Lilac, 
many of the older forms doubtless resembled each other closely and it is doubtful 
whether, in many instances, their superiority was such as to deserve a name. 

Many have disappeared in the course of years, possibly dropped when found 
to have little commercial value, or when surpassed by some newer sort. The identity 
of many has been lost; this has probably been due in many instances to the custom 
of grafting a named form upon stock of the Common Lilac. 

The early descriptions were meager and the color terms used were often vague 
with the result that names were undoubtedly misapplied; the translation of names 
from one language into another, the use of different qualifying names having the 
same or an approximate meaning, carelessness in spelling, the omission of the 
species name, have all contributed to make a positive identification of many of 
the old garden forms appearing in literature difficult and often impossible. 

It is doubtful if the origin of any form which appeared before 1850 can, at this 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 247 

date, be ascertained with certainty; the mistakes incidental to repeated propaga- 
tion are so numerous as to make it also uncertain whether any plant now in existence 
and bearing the name of one of the very old forms is identical with the plant as 
originally introduced. Growing in the collections of the Arnold Arboretum and of 
the Department of Parks, Rochester, New York, are Lilacs, similar in name, but 
differing noticeably in appearance ; nor is it possible to tell with certainty from such 
old descriptions as exist which, if either, is true to name. 

I believe it to be impossible, because of the great similarity between a multitude 
of forms, to take any single description, new or old, and with it in hand, pick out 
the plant to which it should be applied. The difficulty of identifying two living 
flower-clusters of Lilacs bearing the same name which are at slightly different 
stages of development is such that one often hesitates to make even such an identifi- 
cation with assurance; for in a Lilac the color changes markedly after the flowers 
have been expanded for only a short time and even the darkest flowered forms are 
pale before they turn brown and shrivel. 

Such old descriptions of garden Lilacs as exist, however good, can be used as 
general guides to identification merely; for the color terms used have been deter- 
mined, with rare exceptions, by the interpretation placed by their author upon 
such words as lavender, mauve, lilac, blue, purple, red, etc. That a descriptive 
guide less subject to in4ividual interpretation might be provided, the attempt has 
been made, as noted in the preface, to follow Mr. Robert Ridgway's "Color 
Standards and Color Nomenclature." The color terminology used in the descrip- 
tions is meaningless apart from Mr. Ridgway's plates. The number of the plate 
is given in Roman numerals, between parentheses, following the capitalized color 
name or names appearing on that plate. I say "the attempt has been made" for 
even with such an aid to accuracy as Mr. Ridgway's book the difficulty of describing 
the color of a Lilac flower has been great. This is largely due to the rapid change 
in color already noted. 

The colors have been compared with the plates when only a few flowers on 
a cluster were expanded for it is then that they appear to be at their freshest and 
best. Notes were taken at this time (i) on the color of the individual flower bud, 
and (2) of the recently expanded flower. The comparisons were made in the shade, 
not in sunlight. Many of these notes, especially the ones taken in the Arnold 
Arboretum, have been verified and recompared for several successive years. If the 
flowers are picked at the same stage of development it has been found that they 
show little color variation from year to year. The value of such notes exists chiefly 
for the verification of disputed forms. 

As a more general guide I have stated in my descriptions whether the color of 
the flowers was dark, intermediate (between dark and pale), pale or white. This 
records the general effect produced by the half-opened cluster, and all Lilacs 
seem to fall into one of these groups which I have called tones. For use in a 
choice of Lilacs this broad classification appears to me to be of service. One finds 



248 THE LILAC 

no conflicting colors among the pale or the intermediate Lilacs which may be said 
to run in "pastel" shades. Although in some forms the color is pinker or bluer than 
in others, it is never inharmonious. It is only when one attempts to use the dark 
Lilac, which contains considerable red in its coloring matter, that greater care need 
be exercised. 

In addition to noting the color I have stated whether the flower was single or 
double and whether small, medium, large or extra large in size. The size of the 
cluster I believe to be, however, largely dependent upon the age and vigor of the 
plant. Frequent cutting back produces strong growth, and one finds upon young 
sturdy wood, larger clusters and perhaps slightly bigger flowers than one does 
upon old plants which have for years continued to bloom with little pruning and 
consequent renewal of vigorous wood. It is of course true that only of recent 
years has the extremely large-flowered Lilac been put on the market. One has 
only to study some of the old plates to realize that a plant which at one time may 
have appeared to merit such a name as grandiflora or magna would no longer be 
considered worthy of the qualification. 

The fact that garden forms have appeared for the most part in nursery cata- 
logues and horticultural journals, where in many cases no uniform system of nomen- 
clature or of classification has been followed, has made the arrangement of the 
literature dealing with the forms exceedingly difficult. It has not been possible 
to follow in every instance a uniform arrangement although consistency, so far as 
possible, has been attempted. 

In the case of obscure forms numerous catalogue and other references have 
been cited, which, while not perhaps individually important, go to prove the fact 
that the plant was much cultivated. If the origin of the form is known this fact 
is stated in the text. The original description, or any which might be of service in 
the identification of the form, also appears. 

Many of these forms are found listed in recent nursery catalogues of the United 
States. "The Plant Buyers Index" (Gerald Guy Manning Co., Box 52, North 
Cambridge, Massachusetts), issued in 1927, lists many with the name of the nursery 
where they may be procured. No attempt has however been made by the compiler, 
Mr. J. Woodward Manning, to verify whether plants offered for sale are true to 
name. This useful book, I am told, is to be kept up to date. 

Certain of the forms, approximately four hundred and fifty, here enumerated 
are, in the opinion of the author and as is obvious from the text, doubtful plants. 
All forms which have been found are however included and only such have been 
combined as were obviously identical; the present record may be regarded as a 
starting point for further study. 

Unless otherwise stated the form has appeared classified as a variety or form of 
S. vulgaris but for conciseness the name S. vulgaris has been omitted. Variations in 
spelling and in capitalization found in the original have been retained. For conven- 
ience the alphabetical arrangement has been adopted. These forms are: 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 249 

Abel Carriere Lemoine, Cat. no. 134, ix. (1896), "Thyrses volumineux et compacts; 
fleurs enormes, presque regulieres, bleu cobalt vif a revers roses; boutons roses." — Bellair 
in Rev. Hort. 1906, 324. — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 381 (1907). — Barry in 
Horticulture, x. 498, fig. (1909). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1896 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1900). 
Flowers double, large, corolla-lobes pointed; tone intermediate; color in bud Deep Pur- 
plish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) ; when expanded Vinaceous-Lilac to Vinaceous- 
Lavender (xliv.) without, Light Lavender- Violet or occasionally Light Mauve (xxv.) 
within. Clusters long, narrow, open. 

A. B. Lamberton Dunbar according to Horticulture, xxvi. 35 (1917), name only; 
xxvii. 534 (1918), "inclined occasionally to a semi-double, violet lavender"; xxvri. 
553, frontispiece (1918), ". . . Large compound clusters, flowers large, occasionally 
one inch in diameter, semi-double to single on the same cluster. Rich violet heliotrope 
to violet lavender. Seed-parent Marie Legraye. It was named in compliment to Alex- 
ander B. Lamberton, President of the old Board of Park Commissioners for fifteen years, 
and single Park Commissioner for two years. . . ." — Dunbar, Litt. ined. October 3, 
1923, "Flowers semi-double to single, % to Y% of an inch across; reddish lilac in bud, 
rosy lilac to violet heliotrope when fully open; clusters large, 3 to 4 compound. Branch- 
ing habit compact, with branches somewhat tortuous." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 201 Dunbar) of Marie Legraye, 
named by him in 1916. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers single, semi-double or 
frequently double, extra large; tone intermediate; color in bud Vinaceous-Purple to 
Eupatorium Purple (xxxviil); when expanded Purplish Lilac on Light Pinkish Lilac 
without, Saccardo's Violet (xxxvu.) within; the flowers appear to be paler without 
than within. Clusters long, narrow. 

Adelaide Dunbar Dunbar according to Horticulture, xxvi. 35, frontisp. (1917), "It 
is a full semi-double, with flowers % to J^ of an inch across. The unfolding blossoms 
are maroon or dark crimson, changing to violet red when fully open. They are borne 
on large compound clusters. The young shoots are dark colored and the unfolding leaves 
have a dark tinge. Adelaide Dunbar is said to be the darkest colored red Lilac that 
has yet been introduced to cultivation"; xxvii. 534 (191 8). — Dunbar in Florists Exch« 
September 22, 1923, 831, fig. (p. 830), ". . . It is perhaps the darkest double flowering 
lilac in cultivation . . ."; Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers semi-double, % to % 
of an inch across; deep maroon in bud, turning to violet red when fully open. Open 
branching habit.'.' 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 200 Dunbar) of Aline Moc- 
queris, named by him in 1916. "Horticulture" states that Mr. Dunbar named it for 
his wife. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Dept. of Parks, Rochester, 
N. Y., in November, 1922; no. 11,737 Am. Arb.). Flowers semi-double, occasionally 



250 THE LILAC 

double, large; corolla-lobes irregular, twisted, tone dark; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to 
Indian Lake (xxvi.); when expanded Auricula Purple (xxvi.) to Mathews' Purple 
(xxv.). Clusters long, narrow, open. 

Admiral Farragut Dunbar, Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers single, \ x /i inches 
across, bluish lavender tinged violet, lobes slightly cucullate." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 306 Dunbar) of Gilbert, 
named by him in 1923. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers single, large, corolla- 
lobes cucullate; tone intermediate; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous- 
Lilac (xliv.); when expanded Eupatorium Purple with shadings of Tourmaline Pink 
without, Eupatorium Purple (xxxvm.) within, a solid color. Clusters long, narrow, 
symmetrical. 

Alba albo-variegata Weston, Bot. Univ. 1. 289 (1770), as alba 3. albo-varieg., and as 
White-bloatched-leaved white Lilac, name only. 

Appears in pre-Linnean literature as Lilac; flore albo, foliis ex albo variegatis, and as 
the White-blotch'd Lilac (Miller, Cat. PI. 45, 1730; Gard. Diet., 1731). 

Duhamel (Traite Arb. Arbust. 1. 362, 1755) still retains the pre-Linnean form calling 
the plant Lilac flore albo, foliis ex albo variegatis, or Lilas a fleur blanche dont les feuilles 
sont panachees de blanc. 

Here may belong the Lilac alba fol[iis] varieg[atis] mentioned as a name only by Lod- 
diges (Cat. ed. 13, 1823,35), by A. Leroy (Cat. 1847,42, as Lilas blanc a feuilles panachees; 
Cat. 1851, 47, and as White variegated leaved common Lilac) and by Baudriller (Cat. 
no. 43, 141, 1880, and as Lilas commun blanc a. feuilles panachees). Although Weston 
and others distinguish between the forms with yellow (see Alba luteo-variegata) and 
with white variegated foliage, it is doubtful if there was much difference between the two. 

"A short treatise on horticulture . . ."by William Prince (122, 1828) lists a Large 
Flowering White Variegated Leaved Lilac. 

See S. vulgaris var. alba. 

Alba grandifiora Audibert, Cat. 1831-1832, 51, and as Lilas commun a, fleurs blanches 
grandes, name only. — William Prince, Cat. 1835-1836, 51, as grandifiora alba, and as 
Great white flowered Lilac, name only. — William R. Prince, Cat. 1841-1842, 40, as 
Syringa grandifiora alba, and as Great white flowering Lilac, name only. — Seneclauze, 
Cat. 1846-1847, 11, as Lilas, Syringa, commun a grandes fleurs blanches, name only. — 
Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 495 (1864), "Blumen weiss, Bluthen- 
trauben ziemlich locker, Blutenmit langer, enger Rohre," as grandifiora alba Hort., 
and as Grossblumiger weisser Flieder. — Jager, Ziergeholze, 530 (1865), as grandifiora 
alba. — Regel, Russ. Dendr. 207 (1870), as grandifiora alba. — Dauvesse, Cat. no. 36, 
47 (1872), as Lilas alba grandifiora. — Ellwanger and Barry, Cat. no. 2, 42 (1873), 
"(New). Very large, pure white trusses. The finest white," as Lilac (Syringa) alba 
grandifiora. — Hartwig and Rumpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 559 (1875), "Bluthen 
mit langer diinner Rohre, schon weiss, in etwas lockeren Rispen," and as Grossblumiger 
weisser Flieder. — Transon, Cat. 1875-1876, 49, as Syringa alba grandifiora. — Bau- 
driller, Cat. no. 43, 141 (1880), and as Lilas commun blanc a grandes fleurs. — Bardet 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 251 

in Rev. Hort. 1882, 171. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1886-1887, 58. — Carriere in Rev. Hort. 
1887, 227. — Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. m. 537 (1887). — Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. 
1. 113 (1889), as grandiflora alba. — Hartwig, HI. Gehdlzb. 380 (1892), as grandiflora alba 
Hort. — Mouillefert, Traite Arb. Arbris. n. 998 (1892-1898). — Detriche, Cat. 1893- 
1894, 16. — L. Henry in Jardin, vni. 175 (1894), "Fleurs blanc de neige, assez grands. 
Thyrses forts et assez compacts. Variete tres vigoureuse et tres bonne," as Blanc a 
grandes fleurs {alba grandiflora). — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896), as alba 
grandiflora (syn. f. grandiflora alba Dipp.). — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. 
xrv. 206 (1899); in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3298 (1917). — Beissner, Schelle and 
Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. pt. 
i-n. 89 (1920). 

A much cultivated single-flowered white Lilac but probably scarcely different from 
Alba magna and Alba major. Carriere states that the name is used as a synonym for 
Mme. Moser but that this is not correct. The form Mme. Moser according to Carriere 
was introduced about 1877, or much later than Alba grandiflora. 

Mouillefert gives it as a sub- variety of 5. vulgaris var. alba. 

Bardet notes that it is used for forcing. 

Great White has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant 
Names" (485, 1923). 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 4, 1895, from 
plant received from the Museum of Natural History, Paris, in April, 1888; no. 1449-1 
Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, large; anthers visible but not conspicuous; corolla-lobes 
cucullate; corolla- tube long; color in bud Light Viridine Yellow to Pale Viridine Yellow 
(v.); when expanded white. Clusters conical, well-filled, medium size. This plant 
closely resembles the form Marie Legraye. 

Alba luteo-variegata Weston, Bot. Univ. 1. 289 (1770), as alba 2. luteo-varieg., and as 
Yellow-bloatched-leaved white Lilac, name only. 

Appears in pre-Linnean literature as Lilac; flore albo, foliis ex luteo variegatis, and as 
the Yellow-blotch'd Lilac (Miller, Cat. PI. 45, 1730; Gard. Diet., 1731). 

Duhamel (Traite Arb. Arbust. 1. 362, 1755) still retains the pre-Linnean form calling 
the plant Lilac flore albo, foliis ex luteo variegatis, or Lilas a. fleur blanche dont les feuilles 
sont panachees de jaune. 

Here may belong the alba fol[iis] varieg[atis] mentioned as a name only by Loddiges 
(Cat. ed. 13, 1823, 35), by A. Leroy (Cat. 1847, 4 2 > as Lilas blanc a feuilles panachees; 
Cat. 1851, 47, and as White variegated leaved common Lilac) and by Baudriller (Cat. 
no. 43, 141, 1880, and as Lilas commun blanc a feuilles panachees). Although Weston 
and others distinguish between the forms with yellow and with white (see Alba albo- 
variegata) variegated foliage it is doubtful if there was much difference between the 
two. 

"A short treatise on horticulture . . ."by William Prince (122, 1828) lists a Large 
Flowering White Variegated Leaved Lilac. 

See S. vulgaris var. alba. 

Alba magna Nicholson, HI. Diet. Gard. hi. 537 (1887), "one of the finest whites." 
Probably scarcely different from the forms Alba major and Alba grandiflora. 



252 THE LILAC 

Alba major Loddiges, Cat. 1826, 59, name only; 1836, 67, name only. — Loudon, 
Arb. Brit. n. 1209 (1838), "has larger flowers than the previous variety" [= S. vulgaris 
var. alba]. — Nicholson, Diet. Gard. in. 537 (1887). — Parsons, Cat. 1903, 40, "white 
flowers, larger than the preceding [S. vulgaris alba]." 

William Miller (Diet. English Names Plants, 77, 1884) lists, without description, 
S. vulgaris var. alba major with common name of Large-white-flowered Lilac. 

Probably scarcely different from the forms Alba magna or Alba grandiflora. 

Large White has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant 
Names" (485, 1923). 

Loudon refers his plant to that of Loddiges' catalogue of 1836. 

Alba plena Loddiges, Cat. 1823, 35, as alba pleno, name only. — Noisette, Man. 
Compl. Jard. m. 410 (1825-1826), name only. — Loudon, Arb. Brit. n. 1209 (1838), as 
alba plena, S. plena Lodd. — Oudin, Cat. 1845-1846, 6, as Lilas a. fleurs blanches doubles; 
1846-1847, 17. — William R. Prince, Cat. 1856-1857, 44. — Kirchner in Petzold and 
Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 495 (1864), as flore albo pleno Hort., and as Weisser, gefiillter 
Flieder. — Hartwig and Rumpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 561 (1875), "Die beiden 
letzten gefullten Formen sind, abgesehen von der Bluthenfarbung, von dem gefullten 
blauen Flieder nicht verschieden, " &s flore albo pleno, and as Gefiillter weisser Flieder. — 
Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885). —Nicholson, HI. Diet. Gard. m. 537 (1887).— 
Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 113 (1889), "weiss." — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 380 (1892). — 
Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896), " gefullt, weiss." — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. 
Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 206 (1899), as flore albo pleno. — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. 
Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 89 (1920). 

Loudon writes: "5. v. alba plena, S. plena Lodd. Cat., is said to have the flowers 
double, but the plant bearing this name in the Horticultural Society's Garden has single 
flowers." 

William Miller (Diet. English Names Plants, 76, 1884) lists, without description, 
S. vulgaris var. alba-plena with common name of Common Double White Lilac. 

See also the form Noisettiana alba and S. vulgaris var. alba. 

Alba virginalis Oudin, Cat. 1841, 22, and as Lilas commun blanc virginal, name 
only; 1845-1846, 6, as Lilas virginalis, name only. — Bosse, Vollst. Handb. Blumengartn. 
m. 461 (1842), "mit reinweissen, grossen Blumen," as virginalis. — William R. Prince, 
Cat. 1844-1845, 70, and as Virginal White Lilac. — Seneclauze, Cat. 1846-1847, 11, as 
Lilas, Syringa, commun blanc virginal. — A. Leroy, Cat. 1847, 4 2 > as Lilas blanc virginal; 
1850, 19, as Syringa virginalis, and as White virginal Lilac; 1851, 47, and as White 
virginal Lilac; 1852, 58, as virginalis and as Lilas commun blanc virginal. — Dauvesse, 
Cat. no. 20, 24 (1855), as Lilas blanc virginal; no. 24, 42 (1859), as Syringa virginalis 
and as Virgin, white Lilac. — L. Leroy, Cat. 1858-1859, 94, as virginalis. — Kirchner in 
Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 496 (1864), "Kommt mit der gewohnlichen, weiss- 
bliihenden Form so ziemlich iiberein," as virginalis Hort., and as Jungfraulicher 
Flieder. — Jager, Ziergeholze, 530 (1865), as virginalis. — Van Houtte, Cat. no. 117, 12 
(1867), as virginalis. — K. Koch, Dendr. 11. pt. 1. 266 (1872), as Virginalis. — Carriere 
in Rev. Hort. 1875, 403, as Lilas blanc virginal. — Hartwig and Rumpler, Vilmorin's 
Blumengartn. 559 (1875), as virginalis, and as Jungfern-Flieder. — Transon, Cat. 1875- 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 253 

1876, 50, as Syringa virginal. — De Vos in Nederl. Fl. Pom. n. 202 (1876), as Virginalis. — 
Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 144 (1880), as virginalis, and as Lilas commun blanc virginal. — 
Bardet in Rev. Hort. 1882, 171, as virginalis. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zbschen, 78 (1885). — 
Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. m. 537 (1887). — Hartwig, HI. Gehdlzb. 380 (1892), as 
virginalis and as Jungfern-Flieder. — Detriche, Cat. 1 893-1 894, 16, as Syringa blanc 
virginal. — L. Henry in Jardin, vni. 175 (1894), "Ancienne variete a inflorescences assez 
courtes et denses. Fleurs d'un beau blanc; boutons blanc verdatre," as Virginal (alba 
virginalis). — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896), as virginalis, and as Jungfern- 
Flieder. — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903). — Lingelsheim 
in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 89 (1920). 

Appears without specific or botanical name in Oudin's catalogue (1839-1840, 1) as 
Lilas blanc virginal. 

An old and much cultivated form but its origin is nowhere stated. Bosse notes that 
it is mentioned in Booth's catalogue, but gives no date. 

[K. Koch] (Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. xn. 43, 1869) writes: "die 
Form, welche durchaus weiss bliihte, hat dagegen den Beinamen virginalis erhalten." 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883) lists a S. vulgaris a. alba hort. 
Of this he notes: "Haufig angepflanzt (auch als alba virginalis)." 

Mentioned as good for forcing by Bardet (1. c), Nicholson (1. c), Paillet (Rev. Hort. 
1889, 103), Mottet (Rev. Hort. 1895, 242) and Rehder (Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vr. 
3298, 1917). 

Virgin has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant Names" 
(488, 1923). 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 4, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 2974-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, 
small, symmetrical; corolla-lobes broad, cucullate, saucer-shaped; anthers conspicuous; 
color in bud Light Viridine Yellow to Pale Viridine Yellow (v.) ; when expanded white. 
Clusters medium size, interrupted, somewhat conical. This is a simple, fragrant Lilac 
and has the appearance of an old form. 

Albert the Good Ellwanger and Barry, Cat. no. 2, 87 (1886), "An erect vigorous 
grower, with large spikes of reddish purple flowers; the best of its color"; Cat. no. 2, 82 
(1888). 

Ellwanger and Barry state that this was raised by James Dougall of Windsor, Canada, 
and the stock held exclusively by the Rochester firm. First offered for sale in 1886. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Ellwanger and 
Barry in 1892). Flowers single, medium size; tone dark to intermediate; color in bud 
Dahlia Carmine to Magenta (xxvi.) ; when expanded Magenta with markings and edges 
of corolla-lobes Pale Rose-Purple (xxvi.) without, Mathews' Purple or Chinese Violet 
(xxv.) streaked with white within. Clusters short, broadly pyramidal, and in color 
effect somewhat variegated. The flowers appear to be darker without than within. 

Albo-coerulea Hort. according to Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz- 
Ben 413 (1903), name only. — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 89 
(1920), name only. 

Only the above references to this form have been found. 



254 THE LILAC 

Albo-marginata new name. — Render in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 206 
(1899), "mit weisslich gerandeten Blattern," as fol. albo marginatis. — Beissner, Schelle 
and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903), as argenteo-marginata. — Lingelsheim in 
Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 89 (1920), as argenteo-marginata. 

Render mentions this as "wenig empfehlenswert." K. Koch (Dendr. n. pt. 1. 265, 1872) 
writes: "Dagegen durften die beiden buntblatterigen Formen des Handelsgartners 
Scheurer in Heidelberg, die eine mit goldgelb-, die andere mit weiss-umrandeten Blattern, 
mehr Anerkennung finden." 

Whether this form with white margins to the leaves was to be distinguished from the 
form with white markings (see Albo-variegata) is uncertain; the two were probably 
much alike. 

Albo-rosea Hort. according to Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 
413 (1903), name only. — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. I-n. 89 (1920), 
name only. 

Only the above references to this form have been found. 

Albo-variegata new name. — Wiegers, Cat. 1809, 119, as folio ex albo varieg., name only. 

"Le Bon Jardinier" (1783, 318; 1817, 751) mentions a variety of the Common Lilac 
"panachee en blanc," as do A. Richard (Diet. Class. 401, 1826) and Dupuis and Herincq 
(Horticulture, Veg. d'Orn., texte, p. 295, in Reveil and others, Regne Vegetale, 1864- 
1871). Dauvesse (Cat. no. 20, 24, 1855) calls it the Lilas a f[eui]lles panachees blanc. 

Whether this form with white markings on the leaves can be distinguished from the 
form with white margins (see Albo-marginata) is uncertain; the two were probably much 
alike. 

K. Koch in an article entitled "Die Pflanzen- und Blumen-Ausstellung in Karlsruhe" 
(Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. v. 163, 1862) mentions "den weiss- und 
gelb-buntblattrigen Flieder (Syringa vulgaris fol[iis] arg[entiis] et aur[eiis] var.)." The 
first is probably this white variegated-leaved form. 

Alexander Hamilton Dunbar in Florists Exch., September 22, 1923, 831, "... the 
flowers are remarkably large (measuring 1 8 /i« inches across), violet lavender, borne in 
large dense clusters, slightly cucullate." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter of 
October 3, 1923, the late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 334 
Dunbar) of A. B. Lamberton, named by him in 1923. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers double with two corollas 
and additional lobes at throat, extra large; some corolla-lobes expanding to a right angle 
with corolla-tube, some curling inward; tone intermediate; color in bud Light Perilla 
Purple to Argyle Purple (xxxvn.); when expanded Purplish Lilac to Light Pinkish 
Lilac without, Argyle Purple with occasional markings of Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvn.) 
near throat within. The flowers appear to be paler without than within. Clusters large, 
narrow-pyramidal, showy. 

Alexander I. Lemoine, Cat. no. 103, 28 (1886), name only, as Alexander 1". 
Mr. E. Lemoine wrote me on January 16, 1925, that he does not know the originator 
of this form. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 255 

Alf. Neuner Lemoine according to Goemans in Jardin, vr. 171 (1892). 

Goemans states that this is a double-flowered variety of Lemoine's, which, when 
forced in Holland, produces handsome clusters with individual flowers resembling Bou- 
vardia. 

Mr. E. Lemoine wrote me on June 3, 1924: " Je ne connais pas Syringa Alfred Neuner. 
H existe un Bouvardia de ce nom, mis au commerce autrefois par la maison Nanz et 
Neuner de Louisville, Kentucky." 

Aline Mocqueris Dauvesse, Cat. no. 36, 46 (1872), as Lilas Aline Mocqueris, name 
only. — L. Leroy, Cat. 1872, 84, as Syringa Aline Mocqueris, name only. — De Vos in 
Nederl. Fl. Pom. 11. 201, t. 69 (1876), ". . . De afbeelding blijft echter beneden de 
werkelijkheid; de tros is doorgaans veel grooter en de bloemen zijn levendiger gekleurd." — 
Ottolander in Sieboldia, n. 187 (1876), as Aline Mocquerris. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 
43, 141 (1880), "Arbuste florifere et remarquable par ses thyrses volumineux; le plus 
fonce et sans contredit le plus beau de tous les Lilas." — Transon, Cat. 1880-1881, 66, as 
Syringa Aline Mocquery. — Carriere in Rev. Hort. 1885, 310, "Arbuste vigoureux tres- 
floribond. Panicule tres-forte, ventrue, courtement et largement arrondie au sommet, 
tres-ramifiee, a ramifications peu serrees, de sorte que, bien que tres-forte, les grappes sont 
legeres. Fleurs grandes, a. tube effile assez long, tres-colore comme le limbe. Limbe 
court, a quatre divisions de grandeur moyenne, regulierement ovales, concaves ou forte- 
ment cucullees, d'un rouge vineux fonce qui, meme chez les fleurs avancees, prend a peine 
la couleur violet bleuatre, contrairement a presque tous les Lilas de couleur foncee." — 
Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885), as Aline Mocquerys. — Croux, Cat. Suppl. 1889- 
1890, 29, as Lilas Aline Mocquerys. — E. Lemoine in Jardin, vi. 152 (1892). — L. Henry 
in Jardin, vin. 175 (1894). — Van Geert, Cat. no. 169, 44 (1896), as Aline Macquery. — 
Nicholson, HI. Diet. Gard. Suppl. 696 (1900), as Aline Mocquery. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 
1900-1901, 67, "rouge fonce," with single flowers. See Additions. 

Carriere states that this was raised by an amateur of Troyes, France. It was one 
of the forms used by Mr. Victor Lemoine in his pollinization of Azurea plena. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y., (received from Spath in 1892). 
Flowers single, large; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone dark; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to 
Schoenfeld's Purple (xxvi.); when expanded Schoenfeld's Purple (xxvi.) to Bishop's 
Purple or Purplish Lilac (xxxvn.) without, Schoenfeld's Purple (xxvi.) to Mathews' 
Purple (xxv.) within. Clusters long, pyramidal, symmetrical. 

Alphonse Lavallee Lemoine, Cat. no. 101, viii. (1885), "Arbuste touffu, tres ramifie, 
fleurissant des la taille de 60 centimetres, chacque ramification est terminee par un enorme 
thyrse de 20 a 25 centimetres et d'une largeur proportioned, bi-tri-quadrifurque, com- 
pacte, d'une tenue irreprochable; fleurs tres grandes, formees de 12 a 15 petales en moy- 
enne, ceux-ci sont allonges, bien imbriques et donnent a la fleur la forme et l'aspect d'une 
fleur de jacinthe double reduit de moitie, un quart des fleurs atteignent une trentaine de 
petales; la couleur est d'un beau bleu de ciel nuance de violet, boutons purpurins. Malgre 
leur ampleur, les thyrses ne flechissent pas. ..." — V. Lemoine in Garden and Forest, 
11. 328 (1889). — Amer. Florist, xn. 1075, fig. (p. 1077) (1897). — Dunbar in Gard. 
Mag. 1. 233, fig. 321 (1905). — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 322, fig. 131. — Moller's 
Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxh. 378 (1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 



256 THE LILAC 

Introduced in 1885 by the firm of V. Lemoine of Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. Alphonse Lavallee was the owner of a celebrated Arboretum at Segrez, 
France. 

For the history of this form see Azurea plena. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers double, medium size; 
corolla-lobes pointed, expanding into a star-like flower; tone intermediate to pale; color 
in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous (xliv.) to Argyle Purple (xxxvn.); when expanded 
Purplish Lilac (xxxvn.) without, Lilac to Pale Lavender- Violet (xxv.) within. The 
flowers appear to be darker without than within. Clusters pyramidal, medium size. 

Ambroise Verschaffelt C. Lemaire in Illustr. Hort. x. t. 357 (1863), as Lilas Ambroise 
Verschaffelt (Syringa vulgaris var. hortensis Verschaffeltii), "Le coloris de la variete 
Ambroise Verschaffelt est tout particulier; il est interm6diaire entre la variete- type et la 
variete blanche. . . . Les fleurs en sont aussi plus grandes que celles du Lilas commun, 
et meme plus que celles des varietes dites de Charles X., de Marly, etc." — Francke in 
Gartenflora, xii. 191 (1863). — Hartwig and Riimpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 561 
(1875). — Ottolander in Sieboldia, n. 186 (1876). — Baumann, Cat. no. 159, 38 
(1879). — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 144 (1880), as Verschaffeltii, and as Lilas commun 
Ambroise Verschaffelt. — Transon, Cat. 1880-1881, 66, as Syringa Ambroise Verschaffelt. — 
Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885). — E. Morren and A. De Vos, Index Bibliog. 
Hort. Belg. 555 (1887). — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896). 

Lemaire states that this was raised and named by Brahy-Eckenholm, an amateur 
grower of Herstal near Liege, Belgium, and about to be offered for sale in May, 1863. 
E. Morren and De Vos also note, "Obtenu par M. Brahy-Ekenholm, a Herstal." 

Both Lemaire and Baudriller, as well as Dieck mention Verschaffeltii as a correspond- 
ing name for Ambroise Verschaffelt. Another form has, however, appeared under the 
name Verschaffeltii and the two are listed as distinct in such catalogues as Transon (1880- 
1881, 67) and Van Geert (Cat. no. 169, 45, 1896); also by Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey 
in "Standardized Plant Names" (485, 1923). Plants of each name are growing in the 
Arnold Arboretum; they are similar in general appearance, with single flowers, but 
the flowers of Ambroise Verschaffelt are pale while those of Verschaffeltii are intermediate 
in color tone. 

See also the form Verschaffeltii. 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883) lists a S. vulgaris q. hybrida hort., 
od[er] Amb[roise] Verschaffelt. Under this he names many forms of the Common Lilac. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 7, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 2933-1 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, 
medium size, unsymmetrical ; corolla-lobes cucullate on first expanding; anthers visible 
but not conspicuous; tone pale; color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Tourmaline Pink 
to Laelia Pink (xxxvm.); when expanded Laelia Pink marked with white without, 
white tinged with Laelia Pink (xxxvm.) within. Clusters medium size. 

Amethyst Spath, Cat. no. 69, 4 (1887-1888), "Strauss gross, dicht, geschlossen und 
gedrungen. Knospe purpurviolett mit lilarosa, beim Aufbluhen ins Blaue ubergehend; 
Spater amethystf arben ; reichbluhend." 

See Plate cxxrv. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 257 

Introduced in 1887 by the firm of L. Spath, Berlin, Germany, and one of their produc- 
tions. According to information kindly supplied by that firm in January, 1924, this 
was a chance seedling. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Holm Lea, Brookline, 
Mass., in April, 1916; no. 17,364 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, medium size; corolla- 
lobes rounded or pointed, symmetrical; anthers conspicuous; tone pale; color in bud 
Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac to Light Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.); when 
expanded Mauvette (xxv.) to white without, Pale Aniline Lilac (xxxv.) to white within. 
Clusters open, pyramidal, numerous. An excellent example of a simple but pleasing 
early form. 

Amoena Oudin, Cat. 1 846-1 847, 17, name only, as Syringa (Lilas) Amoena; 1849- 
1850, 6, name only, as Lilas amena. — Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 
494 (1864), "Mit dichtblumigen Rispen, dunkler, stark-blaulicher Blumen. Schon." — 
Jager, Ziergeholze, 530 (1865). — Regel, Russ. Dendr. 206 (1870). — Koch, Dendr. 11. 
pt. 1. 266 (1872). — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 141(1880), "Magnifique variete a thyrses 
larges et serres; fleurs d'un rose fonce lilace," as amaena. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 
78 (1885). — Spath, Cat. no. 69, 114 (1887-1888), "grosblurnig, Knospen purp." — 
Muskauer Baumschulen, Haupt-Katalog, 1910, 36. 

Appears without specific or botanical name in Oudin's catalogue (1845-1846, 6) as 
Lilas amoena, name only. 

[K. Koch] (Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. xn. 43, 1869) writes: "Inwie- 
weit Syringa amoena der Garten hiervon abweicht, vermogen wir nicht zu entscheiden." 
He had just written of the Karlsruher Flieder [= Carlsruhensis]. 

Baudriller calls this the Lilas commun agreable; Kirchner calls it the Schoner Flieder 
and Nash (Jour. N. Y. Bot. Gard. xx. 233, 1919) the Beautiful Lilac. 

Kirchner and Baudriller disagree somewhat as to the color of this form and I do not 
know which description is the correct one. L. Henry (Jardin, viii. 174, 1894) objects to 
the confusion caused by the use in nursery catalogues of Latin titles without specific 
name; among those so used he mentions Amoena. 

See also the form Macrostachya. 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883) lists, as a name only, under his 
S. vulgaris q. hybrida hort., od[er] Amb[roise] Verschaffelt a form amoena which he notes 
is cultivated at St. Petersburg. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 4, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 293 1-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, 
medium to small in size, symmetrical; corolla-lobes cucullate; anthers conspicuous; tone 
dark to intermediate ; color in bud Neutral Red to Hellebore Red to Eupatorium Purple 
(xxxvin.) ; when expanded Tourmaline Pink with margins of Pale Laelia Pink without, 
Eupatorium Purple (xxxvin.) mingled with Chinese Violet (xxv.) within. Clusters 
open, large, numerous. 

Andenken an Ludwig Spath Spath, Cat. 1883, 3, "Diese unzweifelhaft schonste 
aller bis jetzt bekannten Fliedersorten ist eine Zuchtung der hiesigen Baumschule. Sie 
wurde unter ca. 1 5000 Samlingen der besten Varietaten gewonnen. Die einzelnen Bliithen 
sowohl wie die Rispen sind sehr gross und von prachtvoll dunkel purpurroter Farbe, 



258 THE LILAC 

nicht nur als Knospen, sondern auch bei vollstandig geoffneten Bluthen." — Dieck, 
Haupt-Verzeichn. Zoschen, Nachtr. i. 27 (1887). — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 
(1896). — H. R. W. in Gard. Chron. ser. 3, xxvn. 115, fig. 35 (1900). — Gordon in Gar- 
deners' Mag. xliv. 495, fig. (1901), as Souvenir de Leon Spath. — L. Henry in Jardin, 
xv. 281, fig. 136 (1901), as Souvenir de Louis Spaeth. — D. in Garden, lxxviii. 413, t. 
(1914), as Souvenir de Louis Spaeth. — Spath-Buch, 222, fig. (1920). 

Introduced in 1883 by the firm of L. Spath, Berlin, Germany; the Spath catalogues 
give it as one of their productions and according to confirmatory information supplied 
by that firm in January, 1924, it was a chance seedling. By some attributed to Reinhold 
Behnsch, a nurseryman of Diirrgoy, near Breslau, Germany. 

The first published description was kindly sent me by the Spath firm in July, 
1924. 

Ludwig Spaeth has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant 
Names" (486, 1923). The form appears frequently as Louis Spath, Souvenir de Spath, 
etc. ; it is commonly called Ludwig Spath. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 5, 1895, from 
plant received from A. Waterer in April, 1887; no. 1596-1 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, 
large; corolla-lobes cucullate, saucer-shaped; tone dark; color in bud Dahlia Carmine 
to Schoenfeld's Purple to Magenta (xxvi.); when expanded Magenta with conspicuous 
margins of Liseran Purple or Pale Rose-Purple without, Dull Dark Purple or Dull Magenta 
Purple (xxvi.) within, a solid color. Clusters narrow, large, symmetrically filled but not 
crowded; the rhachis, pedicel and calyx are tinged Hay's Maroon (xiii.). A floriferous 
and highly satisfactory form and one of the best of the dark Lilacs with single flowers. 
Mentioned by Voss as especially good for forcing. 

Andre Laurent Nollent according to Fl. Stepman-De Messemaeker, Suppl. Gen. 
Cat. [1908?] 2, "Thyrses grands, teinte rubis violine avec fond blanc rose, tres joli colons, '' 
with single flowers. 

In a letter of August 31, 1925, the curator of the Jardin Botanique de l'Etat, at Brus- 
sels, Belgium, informed me that Nollent was the name for the late firm A. Gouchault, of 
Orleans, France. Mr. R. Chenault, wrote me on October 12, 1925, in reply to a letter 
addressed to his father-in-law, Mr. A. Gouchault, that this form was "sent out by a 
firm called Goyer, successor of Laurent, at Limoges, about 1900." I have been unable 
to acquire any information from that source. The names Nollent and Laurent are not 
very different and Stepman-De Messemaeker may have confused the two. 

Andrew Dupont Kelsey, Circular, "Lilacs on their own roots," [cir. 1922], 2, name 
only. 

Mr. Harlan P. Kelsey wrote me on December 5, 1924, in regard to this, and to other 
forms referred to elsewhere: ". . . purchased by me from the Elizabeth Nursery Com- 
pany, Elizabeth, New Jersey, and I do not now have them in stock. If you will notice 
our list of Lilacs in Standardized Plant Names you will see that none of these names have 
been given standing and I doubt very much if there are really any such things as the 
ones named; at any rate, they are not in the American trade at the present time so far 
as I know . . . my suggestion is that those names be dropped. . . ." The Elizabeth 
Nursery Company wrote me on December 11, 1924, that they "did not originate these 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 259 

Lilacs, but imported the stock from the Leroy Nurseries, Orleans, France ..." and 
"have sold out of them." I have been unable to obtain any information from the Leroy 
Nurseries. 

Anemonaeflora Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885), name only. 

Appears in a list of forms of the Common Lilac offered for sale by the "Obst-und 
Geholzbaumschulen des Ritterguts Zoschen bei Merseburg, " Germany. 

Possibly another name for the form Renoncule, sometimes called Ranunculiflora ; 
the flowers of some of the species of Anemone and Ranunculus look somewhat alike but 
the Zoschen catalogue lists as distinct forms both Ranunculiflora and Anemonaeflora. 

Anite Duke Kelsey, Circular, "Lilacs on their own roots," [cir. 1922], 2, name only. 
The information here given in regard to the origin of the form Andrew Dupont is 
applicable to this form also. See Andrew Dupont. 

Anna Elisabeth Jacquet Felix and Dykhuis, Trade letter, July 25, 1924, "purple," 
with single flowers; Cat. [cir. 1925], 26, as Anna Elis. Jacquet, "purpur, " with single 
flowers. 

In a letter of September 1, 1925, the firm of Felix and Dykhuis, of Boskoop, Holland, 
wrote me as follows: "Anna Elizabeth Jacquet . . . [originated with] Moser fils Nurs- 
eries, Versailles, France." A letter from Moser & fils, dated October 6, 1925, however, 
states: "... nous vous faisons savoir que nous n'avons pas du tout cree de lilas des 
varietes que vous nous indiquez, ni d'aucune autre variete du reste. Nous ne pouvons 
done pas vous donner le renseignement que vous nous demandez et nous exprimons tous 
nos regrets." 

Archeveque Lemoine, Cat. no. 197, 19 (1923-1924), "Long straight spikes, round 
imbricated flowers, plum violet with pale gray reverses," flowers double. 

Introduced in 1923 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in collection of T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, N. Y. (plant received 
from Lemoine in 1923). Flowers double, medium size; corolla-lobes broad or narrow, 
unsymmetrical, those at center curling inward; tone intermediate; color in bud Eupa- 
torium Purple to Tourmaline Pink (xxxviii.); when expanded the outer lobes Laelia 
Pink, the inner Pale Laelia Pink without, the outer lobes Eupatorium Purple (xxxviii.) 
the inner Argyle Purple to Purplish Lilac (xxxvii.) within. Clusters medium size, 
broad at base, compact. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 197, 

Archiduchesse Charlotte Duvivier in Jour. Hort. Pratique Belgique, ser. 2, v. 241, . 
xix. fig. 3 (1861), as Lilas Archiduchesse Charlotte. — E. Morren and A. De Vos, Index 
Bibliog. Hort. Belg. 556 (1887). 

According to Duvivier, named for the daughter of the king of the Belgians by a special 
commission of the Societe royale des Conferences horticoles of Liege. He tells us that 
it was produced by the amateur Brahy-Ekenholm from the same cross which produced 
the forms Croix de Brahy, Ekenholm, "d'azur a fleur double" [= Azurea plena], Charle- 
magne and Princesse Camille de Rohan. The forms used in the cross were Charles X. 



260 THE LILAC 

and Noisette [see Noisettiana alba and 5. vulgaris var. alba]. The colored plate was 
painted by Ed. Van Mark of Liege. 

Duvivier describes it as follows: "Les thyrses sont grands, larges, ovoides et abondam- 
ment pourvus de fleurs; celles-ci, se pressant delicatement, ne se deforment aucunement; 
elles sont grandes et leur limbe est largement etale; les divisions de ce limbe se recourbent 
chacune tres-regulierement en un batelet peu profond et d'une elegance parfaite . . . 
coloris . . . d'un rose magnifique, non pas uniforme, mais offrant une gradation de 
teintes qui part du pourtour de la corolle pour arriver a sa gorge ou il forme un oeil presque 
entierement blanc. . . ." He tells us that it was raised from seed sown in 1855 an d first 
flowered in 1861. 

I have found no other mention of this form except in the "Index Bibliographique de 
l'Hortus Belgicus" of E. Morren and A. De Vos, which is a "Catalogue methodique des 
plantes ornementales qui ont ete decrites, figurees ou introduites en Belgique de 1830 
a 1880." 

Arthur William Paul Lemoine, Cat. no. 140, x. (1898), "Thyrses grands, fleurs de 
bonne forme, couleur cocardeau, revers des lobes blancs, produisant un effet eclatant." — 
Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 381 (1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 

(i9!7)- 

Introduced in 1898 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Holm Lea, Brookline, 
Mass., in November, 1920; no. 10,605 Am. Arb.). Flowers double, small to medium 
in size; corolla-lobes pointed or rounded at apex, curling inward, unsymmetrical; tone 
dark to intermediate; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to Indian Lake (xxvi.); when ex- 
panded, the outer corolla Eupatorium Purple without, the inner corolla Pale Laelia 
Pink (xxxvin.) without, both Dull Dark Purple (xxvi.) to Aconite Violet (xxxvn.) 
within, a solid color. Clusters long, interrupted, narrow; rhachis, pedicel and calyx 
tinged Hay's Maroon (xiii.). Large leaves frequently appear at the base of the sub- 
divisions of the inflorescence. The color of the buds is markedly different from that of 
the open flower; also the pale reverses of the inner corolla-lobes are a conspicuous contrast 
with the rest of the darker flower. 

Aucubaefolia Chenault, Cat. 1919-1920, 15, "Les feuilles tres ornementales sont 
largement ponctue de blanc; panachure tres constante; fieur bleu pale," as S. variegata 
Gouchaultii {Aucubaefolia). — Turbat, Cat. 1923-1924, 75, "nice double flowers, lilaceous 
rose in long elegant thyrsus, and with very ornamental foliage. Its leaves, of normal 
size, are largely punctuated with yellow, very constant," as Aucubaefolia {President 
Grevy foliis variegatis). 

Produced by Mr. A. Gouchault of Orleans, France, who kindly wrote me in November, 
1924: "Syringa Aucubaefolia; I found in 1910 a branch of the variety 'President Grevy* 
having variegated leaves and I propagated it. It was sent out in 1919 by Messrs. Leon 
Chenault & Son who advertised it in their catalogue under the name I gave : aucubaefolia; 
several firms added : variegata Gouchaultii because I was the raiser. The flowers are of 
course the same as 'President Grevy' . . . still propagated and sold by Messrs. Turbat 
& Co." 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 261 

While the information supplied me by Mr. Gouchault as to the form in which the name 
was first published does not precisely correspond with the name found in Chenault's 
catalogue of 1919-1920, I have followed, in the retention of the name Aucubaefolia, the 
information supplied me by Mr. Gouchault since I have not seen the French edition of 
Chenault's catalogue. 

The Chenault catalogue here cited states that the foliage is variegated with white 
while the Turbat catalogue notes "punctuated with yellow". It is doubtful whether 
such a difference is of any significance as far as variegated foliage is concerned although it 
has been considered sufficiently important, where other variegated forms have been 
mentioned, to justify their retention as distinct forms. See the forms Alba albo-varie- 
gata and Alba luteo-variegata. 

Young plants of this name were growing in 1927 in the nursery of the Dept. of Parks, 
Rochester, N. Y. The foliage is merely blotched with yellow. 

Aurea Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 141 (1880), " Nouveaute a feuilles toutes dorees, " and as 
Lilas commun dore. — Van Houtte, Cat. no. 225-L, 42 (1887-1888), name only. — 
Spath, Cat. no. 76, 122 (1889-1890), name only. — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.- 
Zeit. xrv. 206 (1899), as aurea Hort. (fol. aureis Hort.). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, 
Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, pt. 1-11. 
89 (1920). 

Oudin (Cat. 1845-1846, 6) mentions, as a name only, a Lilas a feuilles dorees and 
later (Cat. 1849-1850, 6) adds the description "Fleurs bleu porcelaine; tres-beau." 
Ellwanger and Barry (Cat. no. 2, 43, 1867-1868) list a Lilac (Syringa) Gold leaved, with 
"Flowers light purple; very large yellowish green foliage." Under the name S. vulgaris 
foliis aureis they again (Cat. no. 2, 72, 1875) give the same description. Parsons (Cat. 
1889, 49), as a name only, lists a S. vulgaris foliis aureis (Golden Leaved Lilac). All 
these are probably the same as the form Aurea. 

Spath attributes this to Van Houtte. A letter of November 27, 1924, from the Van 
Houtte firm tells me that they can give me no information as to its origin. Rehder notes 
that it is of more value than the forms S. vulgaris fol. Variegatis [=Variegata] and S. 
vulgaris fol. albo marginatis [= Albo-marginata]. 

Whether this form was at one time distinguished from that called Aureo-variegata 
is uncertain; the two were probably much alike. Undoubtedly some of the plants noted 
under the form Variegata may be referred to this form. As distinguished here this form 
is considered to have had foliage tinged throughout with yellow rather than merely 
marked or mottled with that color. See also the forms Aureo-variegata and 
Variegata. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Spath in 1892). 
Flowers single, medium size; corolla-lobes exceptionally narrow, almost filiform, cucullate; 
anthers conspicuous; tone pale; color in bud Light Russet- Vinaceous (xxxix.) to Tour- 
maline Pink to Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvm.) ; when expanded Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvni.) 
without, Light Lobelia Violet on Pale Lobelia Violet (xxxvn.) within. Clusters long, 
narrow, open. The foliage has merely a yellowish tinge. The plant is more curious 
than beautiful and remarkable because of its narrow corolla-lobes rather than because of 
its foliage. 



262 THE LILAC 

Aurea cucullata Wien. 111. Gartenz. xvn. 76 (1892). 

This appears in " Miscellen " as: u Syringa vulgaris aurea cucullata mit goldgefleckten 
gewundenen Blattern ist eine diesjahrige Neuheit, welche sich ganz vorzuglich zur Soli- 
tarpflanzung eignet. Sie stammt aus den Fiirstl. Lobkowitz'schen Baumschulen." 

I have found no mention of this form elsewhere. 

Aurea Joreauensis Baudriller according to Spath, Cat. no 76, 122 (1889-1890), name 
only. 

I have found no mention of this form elsewhere. 

Aureo T variegata Van Houtte, Cat. no. 117, 12 (1867), as foliis aur. var., name only. — 
Baumann, Cat. no. 159, 38 (1879), name only. — Lemoine, Cat. no. 109, 26 (1888), as 
fol. aureo variegatis Baudriller, name only. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1 894-1 895, 25, as foliis 
aureo variegatis, and as Lilas a feuille panachee jaune. 

"Le Bon Jardinier" (1783, 318) mentions a variety of the Common Lilac "panachee 
... en jaune," as do A. Richard (Diet. Class. 401, 1826) and Dupuis and Herincq 
(Horticulture, Veg. d'Orn., texte, p. 295, in Reveil and others, Regne Vegetale, 1864- 
1871). Ellwanger and Barry and Rowe (Cat. 1848-1849, 32) list as a name only, a 
Syringa panache jaune or Yellow striped leaved Lilac. These should probably be referred 
to this form. 

In an article entitled "Die Pflanzen- und Blumen-Ausstellung in Karlsruhe" 
(Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. v. 163, 1862) K. Koch mentions "den 
weiss- und gelb-buntblattrigen Flieder (Syringa vulgaris fol[iis] arg[entiis] et aur[eiis] 
var.)." The second of these is probably this yellow variegated-leaved form. Again he 
writes in the same periodical (xii. 43, 1869) "Vor einigen Jahren fanden wir aber eine 
buntblattrige Form bei dem Kunst- und Handelsgartner Scheurer in Heidelberg, die uns 
gefiel. Uebrigens hat schon Miller in seinem Gartner-Lexikon eine weiss- und gelb 
panachirte Form gekannt." 

And again (Dendr. 11. pt. 1. 265, 1872) he notes: "Dagegen durften die beiden bunt- 
blatterigen Formen des Handelsgartners Scheurer in Heidelberg, die eine mit goldgelb- 
die andere mit weiss-umrandeten Blattern, mehr Anerkennung finden." Whether the 
form with yellow margins to the leaves was distinguished from that with yellow markings 
is uncertain; the two were probably much alike. See also the form Albo-marginata. 

Lemoine attributes this form to Baudriller. In the only catalogue (no. 43, 141, 1880) 
of this firm which I have seen there appears a Syringa vulgaris aurea or Lilas commun 
dore, "Nouveaute a feuilles toutes dorees" [= Aurea]. It is likely that this is the form 
to which the Lemoine catalogue has reference. While it is probable that little difference, 
if any, existed between the form with yellow markings to the leaves and that with com- 
pletely yellow foliage, the two have been retained here as distinct forms since any identi- 
fication must remain uncertain at this date. See the form Aurea. 

Azurea plena Gartenflora, 111. 60 (1854), "... ist eine gefiillte Abart der gewohn- 
lichen blauen." — Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 494 (1864), "Mochte 
von dem gewohnlichen, blaugefullten kaum verschieden sein." — Hartwig and Riimpler, 
Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 561 (1875), as S. vulgaris azurea Hort. — Lemoine in Litt. 
according to Carriere in Rev. Hort. 1883, 550. — Carriere and Andre in Rev. Hort. 1889, 
410. — V. Lemoine in Garden and Forest, 11. 326 (1889). — Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 263 

i. 113 (1889). — Hartwig, 111. Gehdlzb. 380 (1892). — E. Lemoine in Jardin, vi. 152 
(1892), as S. azurea plena. — L. Henry in Jardin, vin. 175 (1894); in Jour. Soc. Hort. 
France, ser. 4, n. 738 (1901). — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896). — Rehder in 
Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xrv. 206 (1899). — Foussat in Jardin, xv. 281 (1901). — 
Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 414 (1903). — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 
1906, 321. — Grignan in Rev. Hort. 1907, 14, and as/, pi. Liberti. — Sargent in Bull. 
Arnold Arb. n. s. m. 22 (1917), and as S. vulgaris flore pleno Liberti; ix. 17 (1923). — 
Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7), as Syringa azurea plena and as S. vulgaris 
fl. plena "Liberti." — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pfianzenr. rv. 243, pt. i-n. 89 (1920). — A. 
0[sborn] in Garden, lxxxvti. 302 (1923). 

As noted below this form first appeared as Syringa vulgaris flore duplo Liberti. The 
name Azurea plena has been retained because of its common usage and because of the 
existence of a single form known only as Liberti (see Liberti) which has priority in the 
use of the name. 

Charles Morren, a botanist of Liege, Belgium, first described this form as Syringa 
vulgaris flore duplo Liberti (Bull. Acad. Roy. Sci. Lettres, Beaux-arts Belg. ser. 1, 273, t. 
(opp. p. 284), figs. 4-1 1, 1853; reprinted in Clusia, 173, t. xiii. figs. 4-11, 1852-1854). 
His description is as follows : " Le Lilas double de Libert a la vegetation entiere caracteris6e 
par moins d'ampleur que le Syringa vulgaris. On dirait d'une hybride entre le Lilas de 
Constantinople et le Lilas de Perse, bien cependant qu'il soit venu d'un semis du premier. 
L'arbuste a. fleurs doubles est plus leger dans son allure; les feuilles sont plus petites, les 
thyrses moins fournis, moins gros, les fleurs moins grandes et la coloration elle-meme 
subit des changements. Sur le Lilas a. fleurs doubles les boutons sont roses, les fleurs 
sont violettes par dessous dans leurs premieres corolles, et d'un beau bleu de ciel pale 
dans la corolle double et le dessus des fleurs; de sorte que ces teintes de rose, de violet, 
de lilas et de bleu jouent ensemble sur les thyrses de cette production. Les thyrses, 
enfin, sont souvent pourvus a leur base de rameaux thyrsiferes eux-memes, ce qui donne 
un aspect de grande richesse a cette vegetation." Again (Belg. Hort. rv. 68, t. vi. fig. 4 
(fig. as Double azure), 1854) Charles Morren writes of this form under the name Lilas 
d'azur a. fieur double, and notes that almost three centuries had elapsed between the 
introduction of S. vulgaris to France and the production of a double form. He notes that 
since 1843 catalogues have announced another double Lilac under the name Syringa 
vulgaris, flore pur pur eo duplici. 

According to Charles Morren this double form was a seedling of S. vulgaris, produced 
in 1843 by the Belgian horticulturist Libert of Liege, Belgium. Edouard Morren (Belg. 
Hort. xxvin. 175, 1878) gives the name of the producer as Libert-Darimont and states 
that nurserymen cultivate it under the names violacea flore pleno, rubra plena, and flore 
pleno, although there are doubtless minor differences between these plants. He writes 
also that there is a Lilac with single flowers in trade under the name Liberti but that 
this name is used erroneously for the single form. See also the form Liberti. 

Again, writing with A. De Vos (Index Bibliog. Hort. Belg. 556, 1887) Morren notes 
this as Lilas d'azur a. fl. doubles. It was, according to these authors, offered for sale by 
Brahy-Ekenholm of Herstal [near Liege, Belgium]. 

Azurea plena is interesting as being the double-flowered form used by Victor 
Lemoine as the starting point in the production of his fine race of double Lilacs. He 



264 THE LILAC 

writes that the rare flowers were largely hidden by the foliage and that the plant was 
more interesting teratologically than otherwise. The flowers had no stamens and the 
pistils were abortive or so hidden by the corolla-lobes as to be inaccessible to natural 
fertilization and no seeds were produced by natural means. Lemoine crossed it artificially 
with pollen from the species S. oblata and from some of the best garden forms of the 
Common Lilac such as Ville de Troyes, Sanguinea, etc., and in 187 1 the plant bore a 
few seeds which germinated and produced the first of the new double-flowered Lilacs. 
One of these was a true hybrid (S. oblata X S. vulgaris) and Lemoine named it S. hya- 
cinthiflora plena [= X S. hyacinthiflora]. Other seedlings which did not show the S. 
oblata strain but which were double or improved single forms of 5. vulgaris were also 
obtained and the best of the former was S. vulgaris jlore duplo Lemoinei [— Lemoinei]. 
Others were Renoncule, Rubella plena, Mathieu de Dombasle and Le Gaulois. From 
this time on Lemoine discarded Azurea plena as a seed parent. The new double-flowered 
race was then crossed with pollen from the best single forms and from this crossing 
resulted the Lilacs Alphonse Lavallee, Michel Buchner, President Grevy, M[ons]. Maxime 
Cornu, etc. Carriere quotes Victor Lemoine as stating that he bought his plant of 
Azurea plena from A. Wilhelm of Luxembourg and did not know whence it was obtained. 

Havemeyer writes most interestingly of Lemoine's work: "Now the flowers of these 
plants are small. This work of crossing demands good eyesight which Mr. Lemoine 
did not then have, and so, he told me, he sought the aid of Madame and placed into her 
care the very delicate work of cross fertilization. This work, first started during the 
Franco-Prussian War, when Nancy was occupied by the Germans, solely as a diversion 
from the trials of the time, was carried on by Mme. Lemoine for many years under the 
direction of her husband. Syringa azurea plena was most difficult to work on, the minute 
flowers being formed of many petals, nearly microscopic, without stamens, and with a 
pistil covered with the lobes of the interior petals, malformed and sterile. Yet this was 
the plant selected for the seed bearing. It was necessary to work from a step ladder on 
account of the size of the bush, uncovering a number of flowers to expose the pistil and 
then apply the chosen pollen to the flower when one was found in which the pistil was not 
too much malformed. . . . Thus it will be seen that the plants finally attained were the 
achievement of patience and tedious work. Even so, the results were ever in doubt, 
and from more than one hundred flowers crossed, the first year produced only seven seeds. 
The following year thirty fertile seeds were gathered, and the work continued. The first 
fruits of the work of Mr. and Madame Lemoine were seen in 1876 when three bushes 
flowered." 

Hugo De Vries (Species and Varieties, 763, 1905) writes: "The double variety seems 
to be as old as the culture of the lilacs. It was already known to Munting, who described 
it in the year 1671. Two centuries afterwards, in 1870, a new description was given by 
Morren, and though more than one varietal name is recorded in his paper, it appears 
from the facts given that even at that time only one variety existed. It was commonly 
called Syringa vulgaris azurea plena, and seems to have been very rare and without real 
ornamental value. . . ." The date of Abraham Munting's "Waare Oeffening der 
Planten" is 1672 but it is possibly to this work that De Vries had reference. On 
page 122 are mentioned four Syringa, only two of which, both with single flowers, I 
believe to be Lilacs. The other two, which Munting called Syringa jlore candido simplici 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 265 

and Syringa flore candido pleno, from his description of the larger flowers and smaller 
leaves, I refer to the genus Philadelphus. No reference to a double-flowered blue Lilac 
has been found and I believe that the first description of such a Lilac is Morren's. The 
form Plena of Oudin's catalogue of 1841 is not found described till 1855. The first refer- 
ence to a double white Lilac, Alba plena, which I know is that of Loddiges' catalogue of 
1823. 

Double Azure has been adopted as approved common name by " Standardized Plant 
Names" (486, 1923). Nash (Jour. N. Y. Bot. Gard. xx, 233, 1919) calls it Blue Lilac. 
Baudriller (Cat. no. 43, 141, 1880) gives it the name of Lilas commun a fleurs doubles 
azurees. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y., (received from Spath in 1882). 
Flowers double, small, with 2 corollas and additional lobes at throat; corolla-lobes pointed 
at apex, forming a star-shaped flower; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Argyle 
Purple to Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvu.) ; when expanded Purplish Lilac to Light Pinkish 
Lilac (xxxvu.) without, Light Campanula Blue (xxiv.) within. Clusters long, narrowly 
pyramidal, interrupted. Not valuable as a decorative form. 

Oudin (Cat. no. 77 [cir. 1854], 8) mentions, as a name only, a Syringa Azurea. It 
seems probable from the date that this is a reference to Azurea plena but it is not stated 
whether the flowers are single or double. The S. vulgaris Azurea mentioned by Hartwig 
and Riimpler (Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 561, 1875) is obviously a reference to Azurea 
plena since the authors state that it can scarcely be distinguished from S. vulgaris flore 
pleno [= Plena]. See also Plena and pre-Linnean synonyms of 5. vulgaris. 

Azure de Gathoye C. Morren in Belg. Hort. 1. 420 (1850), as Lilas azure de Gathoye, 
"Celle-ci se distingue deja par le feuillage et le port. L'arbuste est diffus, grele, d'une 
extreme legerete; les petioles des feuilles tres-longs, la feuille tres-acuminee. Le thyrse 
est tres-allonge, il mesurait pres d'un pied de long, le sommet pendant, les ramuscules 
laches, les fleurs tres-aigues, entierement lilacees passant au bleu, mais sur le dessus les 
quatre nervures medianes marquees d'un beau bleu d'azur. H est evident que ce lilas 
est sorti du Navarin [? = Charles X.]." 

Produced, according to Morren, by Gathoye, a nurseryman of Bayards, lez-Liege, 
Belgium; it flowered for the first time in 1850. Morren states that, when "a peine ne," 
it was used as a seed parent in a crossing made with Charles X. 

Banquise Lemoine, Cat. no. 161, 28 (1905), "Thyrses tres serres, fleurs tres pleines, 
blanches." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1905 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. Havemeyer gives the date of introduction as 1904 but Mr. E. Lemoine 
wrote me on March 26, 1926: "Toutes ces varietes figurent dans notre repertoire de 
plantes aux dates donnees par Mr. Havemeyer, suivant mes indications, mais pour une 
raison ou pour une autre, comme multiplication insuffisante, ils n'ont pu etre offerts 
que dans le catalogue de l'annee suivante, comme vous l'avez mentionne." Mr. Lemoine 
also tells me that the word Banquise means "a very broad iceberg" [or ice-floe]. 

Notes on plant in the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 
1908). Flowers double, hose-in-hose ; color in bud Absinthe Green to Chrysolite Green 
(xxxi.) to white; when expanded white. Clusters narrow, open. 



266 THE LILAC 

Belle de Nancy Lemoine, Cat. no. 119, x. (1891), "Thyrses tres volumineux, reunis 
ordinairement par 4 ou 5; fleurs doubles, a lobes arrondis, forme reguliere en coupe, rose 
satine brillant avec le centre blanc, teinte nouvelle." — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. 
xxii. 380 (1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1891 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1908). 
Flowers double, large; corolla-lobes rounded at apex, expanding into a round flower; 
tone pale ; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous (xliv.) to Eupatorium Purple to Tour- 
maline Pink (xxxvm.) ; when expanded, the outer corolla Eupatorium Purple without, 
the inner corolla Pale Laelia Pink marked with Eupatorium Purple (xxxvm.) without, 
Lilac to Mauvette (xxv.) within; all corolla-lobes streaked conspicuously with white. 
Clusters extra long, narrow-pyramidal, showy. 

Beranger Simon-Louis according to Van Houtte, Cat. no. 121, 41, 42 (1867-1868), 
name only. — Ottolander in Sieboldia, 11. 187 (1876), "vormt een grooten heester, bloeit 
zeer mild; groote tros, matig groote bloem, zeer donker wijnrood; uitstekend schoon." — 
Parsons, Cat. [cir. 1879], 49, "Purplish lilac red flowers." — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 141 
(1880), "Larges fleurs d'un beau rouge pourpre lilace; thyrses enormes affectant une forme 
pyramidal." — Transon, Cat. 1880-1881, 66, as Syringa Beranger. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. 
Zoschen, 78 (1885). — Spath, Cat. no. 79, no (1890-1891), "Grossbl., hellviolett mit 
weissem Stern; Knospe purpur, sehr schon." — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 380 (1892). — 
Simon-Louis, Cat. 1897-1898, 66, with single flowers. — Muskauer Baumschulen, Haupt- 
Katalog, 1910, 36. 

Van Houtte attributes this form to Simon-Louis but does not state whether the plant 
originated with that firm or whether they merelyjntroduced it. Parsons states that it 
was a seedling of the form Gloire de Moulins. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 5, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 2944-1 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, 
medium size, symmetrical; corolla-lobes cucullate; anthers prominent; tone intermediate; 
color in bud Dark Perilla Purple to Perilla Purple to Light Perilla Purple (xxxvu.); 
when expanded Argyle Purple with margins of Light Pinkish Lilac without, Lobelia 
Violet (xxxvu.), a solid color, within. Clusters open, medium to large. 

Bergen Farr, Cat., "Better Plants," 1922-1923, 59, name only. 
This name has not been found elsewhere and is probably a misnomer although it does 
not suggest to me the name of any other better-known Lilac. 

Bicolor Hort. according to Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 494 
(1864), name only, and as Gemeiner zweifarbiger Flieder. — K. Koch, Dendr. n. pt. 1. 266 
(1872), name only. — Hartwig and Riimpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 561 (1875), 
"Die Rohre der Bluthen, sowie ein Theil der Abschnitte der Krone weiss, die Blumen 
sonst violett," and as Zweifarbiger Flieder. — De Vos in Nederl. Fl. Pom. 11. 202 (1876), 
"Bloeit zeer licht, bijna vleeschkleurig en heeft een groote bloemstros"; in Sieboldia, 
11. 198 (1876). — Ottolander in Sieboldia, 11. 186 (1876). — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 
78 (1885). — Van Geert, Cat. no. 169, 45 (1896). — Beissner, Schelle and Zabel, Handb. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 267 

Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903). — Muskauer Baumschulen, Haupt-Katalog, 1910, 36. — 
Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. iv. 243, pt. 1-11. 89 (1920). 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883) lists a S. vulgaris g. bicolor hort., 
which he notes is cultivated at Riga and at Reval. 

There is listed without specific name a Syringa bicolor, Lilas bicolor (Prince, Cat. 
1856-1857, 44, name only) and a Syringa bicolor Hort. (Pasquale, Cat. Orto Bot. Napoli, 
100, 1867). R. Schomburgk (Cat. PI. Gov. Bot. Gard. Adelaide, So. Australia, 1871) 
also lists a Syringa bicolor Hort. Since there is a form of the hybrid S. chinensis which 
was put in the market in 1853 by the Lemoine firm as S. rothomagensis bicolor [= S. 
chinensis f. bicolor], it is possible that this form of the Common Lilac arose as the result 
of confusion with the hybrid form. Such errors sometimes occurred as a result of omitting 
the specific name as in the instances cited. 

Ottolander (Sieboldia, 1. c.) had stated that the flowers of the form Philemon were 
like those of Bicolor but De Vos took exception to this statement. See the form Philemon. 

[K. Koch] (Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. xii. 43, 1869) writes: "Von 
dem Marly-Flieder besass man friiher auch eine Form, wo nur die Spitzen der Blumen- 
abschnitte eine violette Farbe besassen, die iibrige Blume aber weiss war. Sie fuhrte 
deshalb den Namen der zweifarbigen (bicolor)." Evidently therefore this was considered 
to be a form of the Marly Lilac [ = S. vulgaris var. purpurea]. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (it is not stated where this plant 
originated; listed as 5. vulgaris Jlore bicolor). Flowers single, medium to large; 
tone dark; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to Dull Magenta Purple (xxvi.) ; when expanded 
Magenta with margins of Pale Rose-Purple (xxvi.) without, Mathews' Purple (xxv.) 
within. Clusters long, open, narrow-pyramidal. 

Blanc de Carriere Catalogo Jeneral ... del Criadero de Arboles de "Santa Ines" 
(Nos.) Chile, no. 5, ano xxrv. [= 1912], 356, "Flores blancas, grandes, de mui buena 
clase, mui olorosa." 

I have found no mention of this form elsewhere. 

Bleuatre L. Henry in Jardin, vm. 175 (1894), "Variete nouvelle. Fleurs rouge 
vineux a l'exterieur; bleuatres a, l'interieure. Inflorescences fortes et bien fournies, " with 
single flowers. — Lemoine, Cat. no. 146, 24 (1900). — Catalogo Jeneral del Criadero de 
Arboles de "Santa Ines" (Nos.) Chile, no. 5, ano xxiv. [= 1912], 356, " Grandes paniculos 
de flores, reves de los petalos rojo vinoso, con reflejos azulejos en la parte superior, colorido 



nuevo." 



Lemoine's catalogue attributes this form to Baltet but does not state whether he was 
the producer or merely the distributor. It is listed in Baltet's catalogue (1900-1901, 27) 
but no information is given as to its producer. Wister (House and Garden, March, 
1926, 170) attributes it to Baltet but does not state his authority. 

The Lilas bleuatre which appears as a name only, in Oudin's catalogue for 1846-1847, 
10, is probably a reference to S. vulgaris rather than to this form. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 25, 1900, 
from plant received from Lemoine in November, 1895; no. 3807-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers 
single, symmetrical, medium size; corolla-lobes pointed, slightly cucullate; anthers visible; 
tone intermediate; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac (xxiv.); 



268 THE LILAC 

when expanded Pale Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) without, Lavender- Violet (xxv.) marked 
with white within. Clusters compact, conical, medium size, numerous. This form has 
flowers which are a distinct bluish lavender within. 

Boule azuree Lemoine, Cat. no. 191, 22 (1919), "Broad panicles of a rounded shape, 
large single flowers of a perfect form with cucullate lobes, lilac suffused azure blue." 

Introduced in 1919 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in collection of T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, N. Y. (plant re- 
ceived from Lemoine in 191 9). Flowers single, extra large; corolla-lobes broad, pointed 
at apex, sometimes cucullate, expanding into an extremely flat flower; anthers con- 
spicuous; corolla- tube slender, moderately long; tone pale; color in bud Tourmaline 
Pink to Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) ; when expanded white tinged with Light Pinkish Lilac 
without, Light Lobelia Violet tinged with Pale Lobelia Violet (xxxvn.) with markings 
of white near junction of corolla-lobes within. Clusters large, well-filled, showy. The 
flowers fade soon after expanding. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine 's catalogue no. 191. 

Boussingault Lemoine, Cat. no. 134, 14 (1896), "Fleurs tres regulieres, lobes arrondis, 
imbriques, ardoise bleuatre, boutons pourpre carmin, couleur nouvelle." — Havemeyer 
in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 1896 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1902). 
Flowers double, unsymmetrical, tone intermediate; color in bud Light Perilla Purple to 
Argyle Purple (xxxvn.); when expanded, the outer corolla Argyle Purple to Purplish 
Lilac without, the inner corolla Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvn.) without, Bluish Lavender 
(xxxvi.) within. Clusters narrow-pyramidal, small. 

Brougnartii Oudin, Cat. 1849-1850, n, name only, as Syringa Brougnartii. 

Oudin calls this "Le plus beau du genre" and lists it under " Arbres et Arbustes rares." 
Since no specific name is given it is possible that I have not properly classified this as 
a form of the Common Lilac. Oudin appears to distinguish between the Mock- 
Orange which he calls on page 24 of his catalogue Serin gat {Philadelphus) and the Lilac 
which he calls Lilas; nor do I know of any Philadelphus of this name. I have not found 
such a plant mentioned elsewhere. 

Possibly Brougnart is a misspelling of the name of the French botanist Brongniart 
(1801-1876), although such an error would have no bearing upon the plant's correct 
classification. 

Caerulescens Oudin, Cat. 1845-1846, 6, name only, as Lilas caerulescens; 1846-1847, 
17, name only, as Syringa (lilas) caerulescens. 

A doubtful plant. Possibly another name for S. vulgaris. 

Calvin C. Laney Dunbar, Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers single, J^ of an 
in[ch] across, lavender tinged violet." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 318 Dunbar) of Monge, named 
by him in 1923. Named for the former Superintendent of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 269 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers single, large, unsym- 
metrical; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone dark to intermediate; color in bud Dull Magenta 
Purple to Magenta (xxvi.) ; when expanded Magenta without, Auricula Purple (xxvi.) 
within. Clusters large, broad-pyramidal. 

Canadensis Kelsey, Circular, "Lilacs on their own roots," [cir. 1922], "White," with 
double flowers. 

The information given in regard to the origin of the Lilac Andrew Dupont is applicable 
to the form also. See the form Andrew Dupont. 

Candidissima Dammann, Cat. no. 34, 28 (1886-1887), name only. — Catalogo Jeneral 
... del Criadero de Arboles de "Santa Ines" (Nos.) Chile, no. 5, ano xxrv. [= 191 2] 
356, "Variedad de flores de color bianco purisimo, con centro amarillo, agrupadas en 
grandes paniculos sueltos, mui olorosas." 

This form has not been found mentioned elsewhere. 

Capitaine Baltet Lemoine, Cat. no. 193, 22 (1919), "Huge panicles of very large 
flowers of a warm shade of purple lilac, " with single flowers. 

Introduced in 1919 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in collection of T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, N. Y. (plant received 
from Lemoine in 1919). Flowers single, extra large, corolla-lobes broad, sometimes 
curled, pointed at apex and cucullate but without raised margins, expanding into 
a flat flower; corolla-tube slender; anthers conspicuous; tone intermediate to pale; 
color in bud of corolla-tube Eupatorium Purple, of corolla-lobes Tourmaline Pink to 
Laelia Pink (xxxvni.); when expanded Tourmaline Pink (xxxvui.) without, Argyle 
Purple, a solid color, or tinged slightly with Ageratum Violet (xxxvn.). Clusters broad 
at base, with wide-spreading subdivisions, somewhat sparingly filled with large flowers. 
A showy form. The flowers are bluer when in bud than they are when expanded, and 
bluer within than without. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 193. 

Capitaine Perrault Lemoine, Cat. no. 199, 19 (1925-1926), "Grand spikes, big full 
flowers of a superb rosy mauve, buds of the same color, a superior and very late-flowering 
sort," with double flowers. 

Introduced in 1925 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 199. 

Carlsruhensis Hort. according to Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 
494 (1864), "Eine schone, dunkelbliithige Form, ahnlich der 5. v. amoena," and as Karls- 
ruh'scher Flieder. — Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. vni. 88 (1865), as 
Karlsruhensis. — Jager, Ziergeholze, 530 (1865). — O. Kuntze, Taschen-flora von Leipzig, 
82 (1867), "B. gelb berandet, " as Karlsruhensis Hort. — [K. Koch] in Wochenschr. Ver. 
Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. xii. 43, (1869); Dendr. n. pt. 1. 266 (1872). — Regel, Russ. 
Dendr. 207 (1870). — Hartwig and Rumpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 560 (1875), 
"Bluthen dunkler, als bei der vorigen [S. vulgaris var. versaliensis Hort.], fast purpurroth, 



270 THE LILAC 

in besonders stark entwickelten Bliithenstraussen," and as Flieder von Carlsruhe. — 
Lauche, Deutsche Dendr. 170 (1880), "Blumen gross, dunkelroth," as S. vulgaris c, 
S. Carlsruhensis Hort. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), as Karlsruhensis, and as 
Lilas commun de Karlsruhe. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885), as Karlsruhen- 
sis. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1897-1898, 66, with single flowers. 

The plant is mentioned twice in the " Wochenschrif t des Vereines zur Beforderung 
des Gartenbaues in den Koniglich Preussischen Staaten fur Gartnerei und Pflanzen- 
kunde." Both articles are unsigned; the first reference appears in an article describing 
certain new plants growing in "der Laurentius'schen Gartnerei zu Leipzig"; the second 
reference which is evidently written by K. Koch, the editor of the periodical, reads: " Auch 
die Karlsruhe Flieder ist aus dem Marly- Flieder hervorgegangen und zeichnet sich durch 
etwas grossere und gedrangter stehende Bluthen aus." The form was evidently raised 
from the Marly Lilac [= S. vulgaris var. purpurea]. 

Hartwig and Riimpler give as "Lat[in] Syn[onyms]," var. amoena Hort. and S. rubra 
Hort. The form of the Common Lilac Amoena was in cultivation as early as 1845. 
S. vulgaris var. rubra I believe to be identical with S. vulgaris var. purpurea. Kirchner 
notes the resemblance of Carlsruhensis to Amoena. K. Koch and Baudriller list the two 
forms as distinct. 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883) lists a S. vulgaris n. carlsruhensis 
hort., which he notes is cultivated at Golgowsky according to Baron Mengden, at St. 
Petersburg according to Regel and at Riga according to Buhse. Possibly the form 
Karszubiana which he lists as a name only under his 5. vulgaris q. hybrida hort. od[erJ 
Amb[roise] Verschaffelt is the same. The name does not appear elsewhere so far as I 
have found and Klinge's names are sometimes incorrectly spelled. 

Carmen Lemoine, Cat. no. 192, 23 (1918-1919), "Flowers of a perfect shape, very 
pale mauve, almost white, a charming shade." 

Introduced in 1918 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1919). 
Flowers double with three corollas and additional lobes at throat, large; tone pale; color 
in bud, the corolla- tube Light Vinaceous-Purple (xliv.), the corolla-lobes Light Cinna- 
mon-Drab (xlvi.); when expanded, the outer corolla Light Vinaceous-Lilac, the inner 
corollas white without, white tinged with Dull Lavender (xliv.) within. Clusters open, 
much branched. 

This form growing in the collection of T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, N. Y., pro- 
duces extremely showy, long clusters, with wide-spreading subdivisions. The corolla- 
tube is short and stout, and the corolla-lobes are broad, pointed at apex, not cucullate, 
curled; they expand into a round flower. The flowers are so pale as to lack character. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 192. 

Cavour Lemoine, Cat. no. 176, vn. (1910), "Long thyrses eriges, bien fournis, fleurs 
de bonne taille, bleu ardoise tres fonce. ..." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 

(re- 
introduced in 1910 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 

productions. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 271 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Stepman-De Messe- 
maeker in 1914). Flowers single, medium to large; corolla-lobes slightly cucullate; tone 
dark; color in bud Dull Indian Purple to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) ; when expanded Argyle 
Purple with margins of Purplish Lilac without, Bishop's Purple turning to Aconite Violet 
with margins of Argyle Purple (xxxvu.) within. Clusters full, medium size, conical. 
The pale margins give a somewhat variegated appearance to the clusters. 

C. B. van Nes Andre in Rev. Hort. 1904, 102, "Cette variete est d'une fioribondite 
remarquable ; elle produit des thyrses fioraux volumineux meme sur les rameaux les plus 
faibles. Ces thyrses sont plus courts et plus larges que dans le Lilas de Marly [= S. 
vulgaris var. purpurea]. Les fleurs sont d'une rouge fonce analogue a celui de la variete 
Souvenir de Louis Spaeth [= Andenken an Ludwig Spath]," with single flowers. 

Produced by the firm of C. B. van Nes and Sons, Boskoop, Holland. The firm wrote 
me on December 12, 1924, that the description as it first appeared read "light red with 
a yellow eye." They state that it was found by Mr. J. H. van Nes among seedlings of 5. 
vulgaris, and add: "It proved to be a poor grower so that it did not have much commercial 
value and consequently was dropped by us and most other nurserymen, so that we do 
not suppose it is any more in the trade at present unless some French nurseryman at 
Orleans is still growing it." It is listed among the Lilacs growing in the Dept. of Parks, 
Rochester, N. Y., but I have not seen the flowers. 

In the same collection grows a form listed as Mrs. E. van Nes which was received 
from Lemoine in 1905; the flowers appear to correspond closely with Andre's description 
of the form C. B. van Nes. In the letter just quoted, Messrs. C. B. van Nes write: "we 
only know of one variety and that is named by us C. B. van Nes. The variety Mrs. 
E. van Nes which you mention we do not know." 

Chamaethyrsus Andre in Rev. Hort. 1894, 370, figs. 137, 138. — Sargent in Garden 
and Forest, vii. 360 (1894). — Rehder in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 206 (1899). — 
Nicholson, 111. Diet. Gard. Suppl. 696 (1900), as Chamaethyrsa. — Beissner, Schelle and 
Zabel, Handb. Laubholz-Ben. 413 (1903). — Lingelsheim in Engler, Pflanzenr. rv. 243, 
pt. i-ii., 89 (1920). 

Andre states that Machet and Josem, nurserymen of Chalons-sur-Marne, France, 
found a Lilas de Marly [= S. vulgaris var. purpurea] flowering, before the foliage had 
expanded, upon young suckers, only a few inches above the ground; when this had 
been repeated for three successive years the habit was thought to be fixed and the form 
was put on the market about 1894. Andre calls it the Lilas nain. Nicholson refers to 
it as "ground thyrse" and describes it as a "dwarf monstrous form." It is merely of 
teratological interest. 

L. Henry (Rev. Hort. 1904, 277) refers to this Lilac and states that a Mr. Guerrapain 
(Bar-sur-Aube) sent a fragment of a plant which had produced the same phenomenon; 
This, planted out in the Jardin des Plantes, Paris, had not flowered at the date of Henry's 
article. 

The "Journal de Physique, de Chimie, d'Histoire Naturelle et des Arts" (xciv. 393, 
1822) contains an article called "D'un exemple fort rare de Vegetation," which relates 
the following: "... II y a huit jours que M. Villaret, amateur de fleurs de cette ville, 
apercut dans son jardin deux jolis bouquets de lilas rez terre, auxquels il fit peu d'atten- 



272 THE LILAC 

tion d'abord, parce qu'il crut qu'un enfant les avait coupes de l'arbre voisin et les avait 
piques la; comme ils resterent frais les jours suivans, que de nouveaux boutons s'epanoui- 
rent, il les observa attentivement et reconnut avec surprise qu'ils etaient enracines. 
C'etaient sans doute des especes de drageons qui portaient originairement des germes 
de fructification, et qui n'avaient besoin que de l'air et de la lumiere pour se developper 
et se colorer; ils tenaient et participaient a. l'arbre qui etait a. cdte, couvert de feuilles 
depuis quelque temps. Beaucoup de curieux sont venus voir ce petit phenomene, et 
dans l'idee qu'il pourrait interesser les naturalistes de l'Academie royale des Sciences, je 
priai M. Villaret de me donner un des deux thyrses que je joins ici avec la racine d'ou 
il sort, et je l'engageai a conserver le second, afin d'observer s'il croitrait en fructifiant 
et si sa tige pousserait des feuilles." A note of the editor states: "Nous avons appris 

depuis, par une lettre de M. D F , que plusieurs fleurs du second bouquet avaient 

avorte, que beaucoup ont produit des capsules pleines de graines, sans que la tige ait 
pris aucun accroissement." 

Other similar cases have been recorded by Dauthenay (Rev. Hort. 1900, 333) and by 
Baillet (Jardin, xxvi. 163, 1912). In neither of these references is the name of the form 
given upon which the abnormality occurred, nor is the form itself given a name. In 
"Le Jardin" (xrv. 274, 1900) a similar case is mentioned as occurring on the Common 
Lilac in the garden of a Mons. Reviron of Marcigny (Saone-et-Loire). 

Charlemagne C. Morren in Belg. Hort. rv. 69, t. xi. fig. 3 (1854), "Le thyrse de ce 
lilas est gros, plus arrondi que celui des varietes descrites plus haut [Croix de Brahy, 
Ekenholm, d'azur a. fleur double (= Azurea plena)], les fleurs sont plus grandes, plus 
espacees, le tube est plus visible en regardant l'ensemble du thyrse et le limbe plus plat a 
les bords des divisions moins eleves. Le coloris est le rose lilace . . .," as Lilas Charle- 
magne. — Gartenflora, in. 60 (1854). — Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 
495 (1864), as Charlesmagne. — Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. vin. 88 
(1865). — E. Morren and A. De Vos, Index Bibliog. Hort. Belg. 555 (1887), as S. vulgaris 
var. Lilas Charlemagne. — Dieck, Haupt-Verzeichn. Zoschen, Nachtr. 1. 27 (1887). 

According to Morren this form was produced by Brahy-Ekenholm, an amateur grower 
of Herstal, near Liege, Belgium; one of the parents was Charles X. The plant received 
its name from the fact that the garden in which it was raised was near the spot in Herstal 
where Charlemagne was said to have had his stables (stal-der-heer) from which arose 
the name Herstal. 

According to the figure given by Morren the flowers are single. 

The form is listed in various nursery catalogues such as: Baumann, no. 159, 38 (1879) ; 
Baudriller, no. 43, 141 (1880); Simon-Louis, 1886-1887, 58. 

Charlemberg Ellwanger and Barry, Cat. no. 2, 43 (1867-1868), "A distinct variety; 
flowers very small, light purple shaded with pink; compact truss." — Parsons, Cat. 
1889, 49. — Olmsted, Colville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 485 (1923), as Charlem- 
bourg. 

Possibly a misnomer for Charlemagne which I have not seen. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Ellwanger and 
Barry in 1892 and listed as Charlemburg). Flowers single, small; corolla-lobes cucullate; 
tone pale; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.); when ex- 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 273 

panded Vinaceous-Lilac with margins of Pale Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) without, Light 
Lobelia Violet with margins of Pale Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) within. Clusters compact, 
pyramidal. The flowers are dainty and have the simple appearance characteristic of the 
older forms. This is an interesting Lilac in appearance. 

Charles Baltet Lemoine, Cat. no. 125, ix. (1893), "Plante naine et tres florifere; 
des la taille de 75 centimetres le pied de semi portait 16 volumineux thyrses de fleurs 
grandes, pleines, serrees, d'une couleur lilacee au centre, se degradant en rose mauve 
sur les bords, avec les boutons roses." — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 380 
(1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1893 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Dept. of Parks, Rochester, 
N. Y., in November, 1906; no. 17,366 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, unsymmetrical, large; 
corolla-lobes broad or narrow, rounded or pointed at apex, curling; tone intermediate to 
pale; color in bud Hellebore Red to Rocellin Purple to Tourmaline Pink (xxxvm.); 
when expanded Tourmaline Pink to Laelia Pink to Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvni.) without, 
Light Lobelia Violet shaded with Argyle Purple on margins and marked with Pale Lobelia 
Violet (xxxvn.) within. Clusters large, compact. 

Charles Joly Lemoine, Cat. no. 134, rx. (1896), "Thyrses grands et longs, fleurs 
pleines, lie de vin ou mure noire, revers argentes, le plus fonce de tous les lilas. . . ." — 
Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 381 (1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 
(1917). — D. Hill Nursery Co., Cat. Hill's Evergreens, t. fig. 5 (opp. p. 72) (1924). 

Introduced in 1896 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 29, 1904, from 
plant received from Spath in November, 1900; no. 4361-2 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, 
unsymmetrical, extra large; corolla-lobes broad or narrow, rounded or pointed at apex; 
tone dark; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to Schoenfeld's Purple (xxvi.); when expanded 
Auricula Purple to Schoenfeld's Purple (xxvi.) to Light Perilla Purple to Argyle Purple 
(xxxvn.) on inner lobes without, Auricula Purple (xxvi.) within, a solid color. Clusters 
open, medium size. The inner corolla-lobes which are paler without than within roll 
inward and give a slightly variegated appearance to the cluster. 

Charles Sargent Lemoine, Cat. no. 161, vm. (1905), "Thyrses gros et longs, compacts, 
fleurs enormes, d'une dimension inusitee, a lobes larges et longs, enchevetres, d'une mauve 
violace azure metallique." — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 383 (1907). — Have- 
meyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1905 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Holm Lea, Brookline, 
Mass., in April, 1911; no. 17,367 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, extra large; outer corolla- 
lobes broad, round or pointed at apex, inner lobes narrow; corolla-tube short, stout; 
tone intermediate; color in bud Light Perilla Purple to Argyle Purple (xxxvn.); 
when expanded Argyle Purple to Purplish Lilac without, Ageratum Violet (xxxvn.) 



274 THE LILAC 

within, a solid color or occasionally marked with white at throat. Clusters large, com- 
pact, heavy, with a tendency to droop. 

Charles X. Audibert, Cat. 1831-1832, 51, name only, as Charles dix. — Loudon, Arb. 
Brit. 11. 1209 (1838), as Charles X. (S. v. Caroli Lodd. Cat., ed. 1836). — Oudin, Cat. 
1839-1840, 1, as Lilas Charles X. — Ellwanger and Barry, Cat. no. 2, 9 (1855-1856), 
as S. Charles the Xth. — Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 494 (1864), 
as Caroli Lodd. (Charles X. Hort.). — Hartwig and Riimpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 
564 (1875), as Syringa rothomagensis var. regia Hort., Konigs-Flieder; French, Lilas 
royal, L. Charles X. — Lavallee, Arb. Segrez. 169 (1877), as S. vulgaris var. purpurea 
major (Vulg. Lilas Charles X.). — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 77 (1885). — Nicholson, 
Diet. Gard. 111. 537, fig. 560 (p. 534) (1887); in Garden and Forest, 11. 88 (1889). — Dip- 
pel, Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 112 (1889), as Charles X. = rubra major. — L. Henry in Jardin, 
viii. 175 (1894), "Boutons rouge violace s'ouvrant en rouge pourpre. Fleurs devenant 
ardoisees. Inflorescences fortes et compactes mais assez courtes. Ancienne variete, 
toujours tres estimee. L'une des plus employees pour le forcage. . . ." as Charles X. 
{Rubra major). — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896), as "Charles X." (syn. f. 
rubra major Hort.), Konigs-flieder. — Amer. Florist, xn. fig. (p. 1076) (1897). — Gordon 
in Gardeners' Mag. xliv. fig. (p. 497) (1901). — Clarke in Gard. Mag. v. 74, fig. (1907). — 
Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxm. fig. (p. 155) (191 6). — Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. 
Hort. vi. 3298 (1917), as Charles X. (Caroli); 3301 (1917). — D. Hill Nursery Co., Cat. 
"Hill's Evergreens," t. fig. 4 (opp. p. 72) (1924). 

A number of other names for Charles X. are found in nursery catalogues as follows: 
superba (William Prince, 1835-1836, 51. — William R. Prince, 1841-1842, 40); Carolus 
decimus (Oudin, 1841, 22; 1845-1846, 25); violacea superba (Winter, 1843-1844, 62); 
Caroli (William R. Prince, 1844-1845, 70); grandiflora (Baumann, 1846, 15; no. 159, 
38, 1879); Rubra major (A. Leroy, 1851, 47. — L. Leroy, 1858-1859, 94. — Dauvesse, 
no. 24, 42, 1859. — Baudriller, no. 43, 143, 1880. — Simon-Louis, 1886-1887, 58. — 
Spath, no. 69, 115, 1887-1888); Caroli X. (Parsons, 1850, 25. — William R. Prince, 
1860-1861, 42); rouge de Trianon (Dauvesse, no. 20, 24, 1855); major (Van Houtte, 
no. 215-D, 46, 1855-1856); purpurea major (Van Houtte, no. 255-G, 36, 1893); rubra 
(Detriche, 1 893-1 894, 16). 

While this form has been commonly cultivated for many years it has been impossible 
to trace its origin or to find a description distinguishing it with any certainty from numer- 
ous somewhat similar forms. 

Whether such names as Grandiflora, Rouge de Trianon and Rubra major were cor- 
rectly used, in the above references, as corresponding names for Charles X. is uncertain; 
these names were more frequently used without reference to Charles X. and, where they 
have so appeared, have been retained as distinct forms, since at this date their identifica- 
tion and proper classification are impossible. In the case of Rubra major the name has 
also been applied to the Marly Lilac [= S. vulgaris var. purpurea]. Ottolander (Sieboldia, 
11. 187, 1876) cites both Charles X. and Rouge de Trianon as corresponding names 
for his variety Rubra major. Wilhelm Ulrich (Internat. Worterb. Pflanzennamen, 
230, 1872) gives as corresponding names for his S. vulgaris major, of which he gives no 
description, the English name Larger-red Lilac, the German name der grosse Lilak and 
the French names le lilas a grandes fleurs rouges, le lilas royal, le lilas Charles X. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 275 

It is certain that the form Charles X. nearly approaches 5. vulgaris var. purpurea. 
Both have been described as purple and as red. It is probable that the forms of the 
Common Lilac known as Purpurea grandiflora, Rouge royal, Rubra grandiflora, Rubra 
insignis and Rubra purpurea are also close to Charles X. 

It is wrongly classified as a variety of S. rothomagensis [= S. chinensis] by Hartwig 
and Riimpler. Decaisne and Naudin (Man. Amateur Jard. in. 88, fig. 27, 1862-1866) 
and Hemsley (Handb. Hardy Trees, 296, fig. 165, 1877) also wrongly classify it as a 
variety of S. dubia [= S. chinensis]. Mouillefert (Traite Arb. Arbis. 11. 998, 1892- 
1898) mentions it as a sub-variety of S. vulgaris var. purpurea and calls it "rubra major, 
vulg. L. Charles X." 

While certain catalogues mention Caroli or Caroli X. as corresponding names for 
Charles X., yet Spath (Cat. no. 69, 114, 115, 1887-1888) mentions as separate forms S. 
vulgaris rubra major (Charles X.) and S. vulgaris Caroli Lodd.; Olmsted, Colville and 
Kelsey (Stand. PL Names, 485, 1923) keep as distinct Caroli and Charles the Tenth. The 
S. vulgaris caroli of Loddiges' catalogue (1836, 67) appears as a name only. Loddiges 
does not mention the form Charles X. although Loudon cites the name of Loddiges' plant 
as identical with the name Charles X. The plant mentioned by Loudon as Charles X. 
(S. v. Caroli Lodd.) was growing at the Loddiges arboretum and was received from Sou- 
lange-Bodin. Loudon writes that it "appears to be a variety of S. v. purpurea" although 
he notes that he saw it only in leaf. Kirchner considers the forms Charles X. and Caroli 
to be the same. The two names appear separately also in the catalogue of the Muskauer 
Baumschulen (Haupt-Katalog, 1910, 36). A plant bearing the name Caroli is growing in 
the Rochester collection, but, as described later, is not the same as either the Rochester 
or the Arnold Arboretum plant of Charles X. 

A. Leroy (Cat. 1850, 9) lists, as a name only, a Syringa royalis or Royal lilac which 
may be the same as Charles X. Carriere (Rev. Hort. 1877, 203) mentions Lilas royal 
as a corresponding name for Charles X. See the form Rouge royal. 

This form has been much used for forcing; its suitability for this purpose has been 
discussed by Carriere (Rev. Hort. 1877, 158, 203). Paillet (Rev. Hort. 1889, 103), Mottet 
(Rev. Hort. 1895, 241), Voss (1. c), and many others note that it is especially good for 
this purpose. Maumene (Jardin, xvi. 312, figs. 174, 175, 1902; xvni. 57, fig. 36, 1904) 
and Lochot (Rev. Hort. 1904, 252, fig. 103) discuss the use of ether in its forcing, and 
numerous illustrations show it as a forced plant. 

Instances of its abnormal flowering are given by Carriere (Rev. Hort. 1875, 403) and 
by Carriere and Andre (Rev. Hort. 1884, 315). 

The flowers of Charles X. in the Rochester and Arnold Arboretum collections are not 
the same. Both descriptions follow since I am uncertain which, if either, is true to name. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Spath or Barbier 
in 1908). Flowers single, medium size; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone intermediate; color 
in bud Schoenfeld's Purple (xxvi.) to Light Perilla Purple (xxxvii.); when expanded 
Argyle Purple without, Saccardo's Violet (xxxvn.) within. Clusters broadly pyramidal, 
open, medium size. The flowers appear to be paler without than within. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 10, 1895, 
from plant received from A. Waterer in April, 1887; no. 17,368-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers 
single, medium size, symmetrical; corolla-lobes broad, cucullate, rounded or slightly 



276 THE LILAC 

pointed at apex; anthers visible but not conspicuous; tone dark to intermediate; color in 
bud Neutral Red to Deep Hellebore Red to Eupatorium Purple (xxxviii.); when ex- 
panded Eupatorium Purple to Tourmaline Pink (xxxviii.) without, Dull Magenta Purple 
(xxvi.) to Saccardo's Violet marked with Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) within. Clusters 
compact, medium size, conical. 

Notes on the plant of Caroli in the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from 
Lemoine in 1900). Flowers single, medium size; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone dark to 
intermediate; color in bud Neutral Red to Deep Hellebore Red (xxxviii.); when ex- 
panded Eupatorium Purple to Pale Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) without, Dull Magenta Purple 
(xxvi.) to Chinese Violet to Lilac (xxv.) within. Clusters broad-pyramidal. This 
has the appearance of an old form. 

A form of Charles X. with variegated leaves is mentioned as a name only by Dauvesse 
(Cat. no. 36, 46, 1872) as Lilas Charles X. a feuilles panachees jaune. Baudriller (Cat. 
no. 43, 143, 1880) lists it also as S. vulgaris rubra major foliis aureo variegatis and as Lilas 
commun Charles X. a feuilles panachees de jaune. L. Henry (1. c.) mentions the exist- 
ence of "une variation a feuilles panache dore." Although called S. vulgaris L. Charles 
X. fol[iis] arg[enteis] var. by C. van Kleef (Sieboldia, in. 376, 1877) the plant's leaves 
are described as yellow dotted, — "Met geel gevlekte bladeren," — which does not account 
for the use of the adjective "argenteis" or silvery. It is undoubtedly the same plant as 
that mentioned by Dauvesse, etc. 

Charlet Baltet, Cat. 1900-1901, 28, "Rouge vineux, " as Lilas Charlet. 

Probably the same as the Lina Charlet mentioned in the Journal de la Societe nationale 
d'Horticulture de France (ser. 4, xxi. 147, 1920) as a Lilac with single flowers exhibited 
at a meeting of that society on April 22, 1920, by Lorion of the firm of Abel Chatenay. 
The words Lilas and Lina might easily have been confused; or possibly an error for 
Charles X. This is a doubtful plant. 

Christophe Colomb Lemoine, Cat. no. 161, 30 (1905), "Fleurs enormes, tr&s rondes, 
lilas tendre." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

See Plates cxxix., cxxxiii. 

Introduced in 1905 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France and one of their 
productions. Havemeyer gives the date of introduction as 1904. See Banquise for the 
explanation of this difference in dates. 

Christopher Columbus has been adopted as approved common name by "Standard- 
ized Plant Names" (485, 1923). 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Lemoine in November, 
1905; no. 51 17 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, symmetrical, large; corolla-lobes rounded 
at apex, cucullate, saucer-shaped; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep 
Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.); when expanded Light Vinaceous- 
Lilac to Pale Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) without, Light Mauve (xxv.) to Hay's Lilac 
(xxxvu.) with markings of white near throat within. Clusters long, conical, well-filled, 
large. This is to me one of the most distinct of all the garden forms of the Common 
Lilac, with saucer-shaped, unusually symmetrical flowers and closely filled clusters. 
These are numerous, the plant often flowering from two pairs of lateral buds on the same 
branchlet. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 277 

Citriflora Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 141 (1880), name only, and as Lilas commun a 
fleurs d'Oranger. — Transon, Cat. 1882-1883, 67, name only; 1886-1887, 76, name only. — 
Dieck, Haupt-Verzeichn. Zoschen, Nachtr. 1. 27 (1887), name only. — Van Geert, Cat. no. 
169, 44 (1896), name only. 

In all of the above references, with the exceptions of those of Baudriller and Dieck, 
the form appears merely under the descriptive name "a fleurs d'Oranger." Under that 
name it is listed without description by Dauvesse as early as 1872 (Cat. no. 36, 46, 1872). 

Baudriller mentions it as a " Variete nouvelle que Ton dit tres-remarquable." Parsons 
(Cat. 1903, 40) calls it Syringa vulgaris fleur d'oranges, "Beautiful white variety." 

In the manuscript catalogue of the plants in the garden of the Forest Academy at 
Muenden, Hanover, which was purchased by the Arnold Arboretum with the H. Zabel 
herbarium, an entry records that Syringa vulgaris citrifolia was received in October, 1884, 
from the Koster nursery. 

Clara Cochet Petit-Coq in Jour, des Roses, 1885, 176, t. 12, "Le pied- mere de ce 
lilas ne s'eleva qu'a deux metres et quelque chose, s'etendant, a cette hauteur, en une 
clme Slargie, couronn£e d'une elegante inflorescence thyrsoideuse, composee de legeres 
panicules de 14-15 centimetres de longueur, sur une egale largeur (a. la base bien entendu) 
montrant d'abord des boutons de couleur carnee foncee, a. tubes lilaces vif, auxquels se 
melent bientot des corolles ouvertes, blanches, a teinte carnee attenuee a peine d'une 
ombre de lilace pale, ayant un point central jaune verdatre du a la couleur des examines. 
Cette excellente variete de lilas fieurit abondamment et des sa deuxieme annee de 
greffe. . . ." — Viviand-Morel in Lyon-Hort. vin. no (1886). — Sargent in Garden and 
Forest, vi. 290 (1893). — Grosdemange in Rev. Hort. 1893, 2 &6. — De Duren in Rev. 
Hort. Beige Etr. xxi. 157 (1895). 

Petit-Coq states that this was a seedling found about 1855 by Cochet of Suisnes, 
France. Scipion Cochet put it on the market about 1885 and named it for his daughter. 
Viviand-Morel notes that in the "Annales de la Societe nantaise d'horticulture " [the 
reference is not given] Renault contested the newness of this form. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Holm Lea, Brookline, 
Mass., in April, 1915; no. 7328 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, symmetrical, small; corolla- 
lobes cucullate; anthers visible; tone pale; color in bud of corolla- tube Lilac (xxv.), of 
corolla-lobes Vinaceous to Hydrangea Pink (xxvii.) ; when expanded Pale Persian Lilac 
(xxxvni.) to Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvri.) to white both within and without. Clusters 
somewhat conical, open, medium size. An unusual color among forms of the Common 
Lilac, closely approaching a flesh color. This is a charming Lilac of simple appearance 
but not a profuse bloomer in the Arboretum. 

Clarence D. Van Zandt Dunbar, Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers single, Y% of 
an in[ch] across, buds dark red, rosy blush lilac when fully open, clusters 9 inches long. 
Branching habit compact." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 236 Dunbar) of Aline Moc- 
queris, named by him in 1923. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers single, large; tone dark 
to intermediate; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to Magenta (xxvi.); when expanded 



278 THE LILAC 

Magenta with occasional markings of Pale Rose-Purple (xxvr.) without, Mathews' 
Purple to Chinese Violet (xxv.) within; the flowers appear to be darker without than 
within. Clusters long, narrow, pyramidal, well-filled. 

Claude le Lorrain Lemoine, Cat. no. 113, 9 (1889), "Fleurs tres grandes, 2 centi- 
metres et demi de largeur, pourpre lie-de-vin passant au violet; thyrses volumineux." — 
Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7), as Claude de Lorraine. 

Introduced in 1889 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. Havemeyer gives the date of introduction as 1890. See Banquise for the 
explanation of this difference in dates. 

Not^s on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Stepman-De 
Messemaeker in 1914). Flowers single, large, corolla-lobes cucullate at first, later open- 
ing flat, tone intermediate; color in bud Vinaceous-Purple (xxxvm.); when expanded 
Eupatorium Purple with margins of Laelia Pink without, Eupatorium Purple (xxxvm.) 
within. Clusters dense, conical, medium size. 

Coerulea superba Ellwanger and Barry, Cat. no. 2, 38 (1869), "Flowers light purple 
in bud, when fully open a clear blue; truss very large; the finest of its color in cultiva- 
tion," as Coerulea Superba. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 141 (1880). — Transon, Cat. 1882- 
1883, 67, as Syringa Coerulea superba. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885). — 
Parsons, Cat. 1903, 40. — Barry in Horticulturist, x. 499 (1909). 

Ellwanger and Barry (Cat. no. 2, 43, 1867-1868) state that this is one of their seedlings 
which was to be offered for sale in 1868. The name appears in 186 7- 1868 as Coerulea 
but in 1869 was changed to Coerulea Superba and this later name has here been retained 
since Syringa vulgaris 4. coerulea was used by Weston in 1770 and has appeared as 
a synonym of S. vulgaris. 

Royal Blue has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant 
Names" (487, 1923). Baudriller calls it the Lilas commun bleu superbe. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Ellwanger and 
Barry in 1892). Flowers single, medium size; corolla-lobes cucullate, forming a saucer- 
shaped flower; tone intermediate; color in bud Vinaceous-Drab (xlv.) to Argyle Purple 
to Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.); when expanded Purplish Lilac to Light Pinkish Lilac 
(xxxvu.) without, Light Lavender- Violet or Light Mauve (xxv.) within; the flowers 
appear to be paler without than within. Clusters long, open, poorly filled. The open 
flowers are a distinct blue when first expanded. 

In color the flowers of Coerulea superba are probably very similar to those of typical 
S. vulgaris. The color notes of Coerulea superba, a plant differing, it is probable, chiefly 
in the larger size of its flowers, have therefore been used as corresponding to those of the 
Common Lilac. See 6". vulgaris. 

Colbert Lemoine, Cat. no. 143, 22 (1899), "Fleurs grandes, pleines, cocardeau 
clair." — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 321. — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1899 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France and one of their 
productions. Havemeyer gives the date of introduction as 1898. See Banquise for the 
explanation of this difference in dates. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 25, 1900, from 
plant received from Lemoine in April, 1900; no. 4607-1 Am. Arb.). Flowers double, 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 279 

unsymmetrical, large; corolla-lobes broad or narrow, pointed at apex; tone intermediate; 
color in bud Neutral Red to Veraonia Purple to Tourmaline Pink (xxxviii.); when 
expanded, the outer corolla Tourmaline Pink (xxxvm.) without, Argyle Purple (xxxvn.) 
within, the inner corolla Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvm.) without, Lilac (xxv.) marked with 
occasional white or rarely with Lobelia Violet (xxxvii.) at throat within. Clusters 
compact, medium size. 

Colmariensis Prevost in Ann. Fl. Pomone, ser. 2, iv. 253 (1846), as Syringa colmariensis 
(Lilas de Colmar); in Jour. Hort. Prat. Belg.v. 96 (1848). — Oudin, Cat. 1846-1847, 11, 
as Lilas de Colmar; 17, as Syringa (lilas) Colmariensis, and as Lilas de Colmar. — Ell- 
wanger and Barry, Cat. 1848-1849, 32, as Syringa Colmariensis; no. 2, 43 (1867-1868); 
no. 2, 72 (1876), and as Colmar Lilac. — L. Leroy, Cat. 1876, 72. 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883) lists a S. vulgaris 1. colmariensis 
hort., which he notes is cultivated at Riga according to Wagner's catalogue and at Reval 
according to Dietrich. 

Prevost, in an article entitled "Observations sur le merite reel de deux varietes nou- 
velles de Lilas, " writes of two Lilacs, — the first, Prince Notger, put on the market about 
1840, and the second, Colmariensis, introduced slightly later, — as follows: "En 1845, 
ces deux Lilas m'ont donne quelques fleurs; mais sachant par experience que vouloir 
juger du merite des fleurs d'un Lilas qui n'a pas encore acquis une vigueur suffisant ni 
produit une belle vegetation est une faute, j'ai du attendre la fioraison de cette annee; 
elle a ete aussi belle que possible. Mais grande a ete ma surprise lorsque j'ai vu que le 
Prince Notger et le Lilas de Colmar se ressemblent, et ressemblent tous les deux a ces 
mauvais Lilas a. thyrses maigres, a fleurs petites et tres-pale, que nous trouvons assez 
souvent dans les semis et que je fais detruire autant que possible chez moi, afin de ne pas 
tromper desagreablement ceux qui achetent des Lilas communs. Voici en quoi le Lilas 
de Colmar differe du Lilas commun: i° Ses rameaux sont ordinairement plus minces, 
ses merithalles plus longs; 2° Ses feuilles, plus espacees et moins nombreuses, sont plus 
minces, plus fortement nervees et moins lisses, plus longuement acuminees, d'un vert 
moins fonce et moins agreable; 3 Ses thyrses sont plus etroits, moins volumineux, moins 
multiflores; 4 Son calice est moins court, sa corolle est plus petite, d'un gris bleuatre 
tres-pale, a tube plus allonge, a divisions plus etroites." After noting the differences in 
the Lilac Prince Notger Prevost continues: "Ces deux pretendues nouveautes peuvent 
done etre considerees comme identiques, et constituant la variete la moins fiorifere, la 
plus pale et la moins agreable de celles que produisent les graines du Lilas commun; 
variete sans merite et ne valant pas la culture." Prevost states that the persons who 
sold him his plants were honest and did so in ignorance of their true character, but he 
adds, " Quant aux charlatans qui les ont nommes et mis dans le commerce, je ne les connais 
pas et les en felicite, car j'aurais probablement succombe a. la tentation de citer leurs 
noms." It is of course possible that Prevost did not receive plants which were true to 
name. 

J. C. Wister (Nat. Hort. Mag. vi. 14, 1927) cites Colmariensis as a synonym for the 
Lilac Senateur Volland which was introduced in 1887 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils. 
Since the former was, according to Prevost, in trade soon after 1840, it is apparent that 
the two cannot be identical. Moreover Senateur Volland has double flowers and there is 
every reason to believe that those of Colmariensis were single. 



280 THE LILAC 

Nash (Jour. N. Y. Bot. Gard. xx. 233, 1919) calls this the Colmar Lilac, and Colmar 
has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant Names" (485, 

1923)- 

Apart from the articles by Prevost no description of this Lilac has been found. The 
Ellwanger and Barry catalogue no. 2, 43 (1867-1868) merely notes: "Very fine glossy 
foliage; flowers very large." 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Ellwanger and 
Barry in 1892). Flowers single, small; corolla-lobes cucullate, narrow; tone intermediate 
to pale; color in bud Argyle Purple to Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.); when expanded Hay's 
Lilac (xxxvu.) without, Light Hyssop Violet marked with Pale Bluish Lavender (xxxvi.) 
within. Clusters open, widely branched. The pale margins of the corolla-lobes give a 
slightly variegated appearance to the clusters. 

Compacta Miller (Bristol Nursery), Cat. 1826, 14, name only, as compacta, or 
Chinese Lilac. — Horticulture, v. 813 (1907) (Extract from Jour. Hort.; no reference 
given). 

In "Horticulture" this is listed under "good varieties in which the fragrance is not so 
well denned. . ."; it is said to be "single, white." As noted under S. chinensis, the 
Miller reference cited above may be a wrong classification of that hybrid as identical 
with S. vulgaris; or possibly it may be a form of S. vulgaris wrongly called Chinese 
Lilac. I have only found it mentioned in these two references. 

Comte Adrien de Montebello Lemoine, Cat. no. 176, vn. (1910), "Thyrses volumi- 
neux, obtus, plus larges que hauts, fleurs grandes, pleines, globuleuses, a. lobes arrondis, 
lilas azure fonce a centre bleu cendre, revers blanc. Plante tr&s florifere, dont tous les 
rameaux sont boutonnes." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1910 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 191 2). 
Flowers double, large; tone pale; color in bud Livid Brown (xxxix.) to Tourmaline 
Pink (xxxvin.) ; when expanded Purplish Lilac on Light Pinkish Lilac without, Lobelia 
Violet (xxxvu.) within; the flowers appear to be paler without than within. Clusters 
large, open, widely branched, showy. 

Comte de Kerchove Lemoine, Cat. no. 143, x. (1899), "Plante dont tous les rameaux 
sont termines par de larges panicules compactes, fleurs moyennes, rose cendre, port 
ramasse, floribondite tres grande." — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 322. — Moller's 
Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 382 (1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1899 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 20, 1905, from 
plant received from Lemoine in April, 1900; no. 4613-2 Am. Arb.). Flowers double, 
unsymmetrical, large; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Neutral Red to Deep 
Hellebore Red to Eupatorium Purple (xxxvm.); when expanded Eupatorium Purple 
or Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvm.) without, Lilac (xxv.) shading to Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.) 
within. Clusters open, large. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 281 

Comte de Paris Froebel, Cat. no. 116, 17 (1893), "Grandes panicules de fleurs d'un 
beau rouge fonce, dans le genre de Charles X., tres belle variete." — Baltet, Cat. 1900- 
1901, 28, "Belle panicule, violet pourpre," with single flowers. 

Only found mentioned by Froebel and by Baltet. 

Comte Horace de Choiseul Lemoine, Cat. no. 107, vin. (1887), "Thyrses de plus de 
20 centimetres, fleurs dans le genre de celles de la variete rubella plena, mais d'un coloris 
plus fonce et plus rougeatre, tirant sur l'ardoise ou le lie de vin." — Moller's Deutsch. 
Gartn.-Zeit. xxii. 379 (1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1887 by the ^ m °f V. Lemoine, Nancy, France, and one of their pro- 
ductions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Holm Lea, Brookline, 
Mass., in April, 1915; no. 17,369 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, medium size; corolla- 
lobes rounded or pointed at apex; tone intermediate; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to 
Magenta (xxvi.) ; when expanded Eupatorium Purple marked with Laelia Pink (xxxvin.) 
without, same within. Clusters open, widely branched, medium size, somewhat variegated 
in appearance. 

Comtesse Horace de Choiseul Lemoine, Cat. no. 119, x. (1891), "Plante identique 
pour son port, la forme de ses fleurs et la grandeur de ses thyrses, a la belle variete Pyra- 
midal dont elle provient; mais la couleur est d'un blanc porcelaine grisatre avec des reflets 
roses, et les boutons sont de nuance chair; magnifique variete." — Nicolas in Jardin, 
ix. 80 (1895). — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxii. 380 (1907). — Havemeyer in 
Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 1891 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Dickson in 1892). 
Flowers double, medium to small in size ; corolla-lobes pointed, opening into a star-shaped 
flower; tone pale; color in bud Dark Olive-Buff to Olive-Buff (xl.) with a tinge of Laelia 
Pink (xxxvin.) ; when expanded white tinged with Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvn.) without, 
same turning to white within. Clusters long, widely branched, well-filled, rather feathery 
in appearance. 

Condorcet Lemoine, Cat. no. no, 13 (1888), "Longs thyrses volumineux, reunis par 
2 ou 4 fleurs enormes, semi-double, a larges lobes arrondis, bleu ardoise, revers blancs." — 
Nicolas in Jardin, ix. 80 (1895). — Amer. Florist, xn. 1075, fig. (1897), as Condorset. — 
Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 321. — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1888 by the firm of V. Lemoine, Nancy, France, and one of their pro- 
ductions. 

Garden and Forest (x. 227, 1897) mentions a form Concordat as growing in the 
Arnold Arboretum; this is probably a misnomer for this form. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 5, 1895, from 
plant received from Lemoine in November, 1889; no. 3450-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers semi- 
double to double, medium size, unsymmetrical ; corolla-lobes pointed or rounded at apex, 
narrow or broad; tone intermediate; color in bud Neutral Red to Eupatorium Purple 
(xxxvni.); when expanded Tourmaline Pink to Pale Laelia Pink marked Tourmaline 



282 THE LILAC 

Pink without, Eupatorium Purple (xxxviii.) to Argyle Purple (xxxvii.) marked with 
white within. Clusters compact, medium size. 

Congo Lemoine, Cat. no. 134, n (1896), "Fleurs tres larges, thyrses enormes, rouge 
giroflee vif ; plus rougeatre que Souvenir de Spaeth." — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. 
xxii. 381 (1907). — Wilson, Aristocrats of the Garden, t. (opp. p. 213) (1917). — Have- 
meyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 1896 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Under the title "' Kongo' eine empfehlenswerte einfachbluhende Treibfiiedersorte " 
O. Krauss (Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxix. 333, 1914) writes of this form for forcing 
purposes. Two other short paragraphs follow, written by R. Miiller and P. Ullrich, 
which deal with the same subject. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 30, 1900, from 
plant received from Lemoine in April, 1900; no. 461 1-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, 
large; corolla-lobes broad, cucullate, opening into a symmetrical flower; anthers visible; 
tone dark to intermediate ; color in bud Indian Lake to Magenta (xxvi.) ; when expanded 
Argyle Purple with margins of Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvii.) without, Magenta (xxvi.) 
to Bishop's Purple with markings of Saccardo's Violet (xxxvii.) at throat within. Clusters 
open, large. 

Corinne Baltet, Cat. 1900-1901, 28, "Panicule tres compacte, rubis lilace vif," as 
Lilas Corinne. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1900). 
Flowers single, small; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone intermediate; color in bud Deep 
Purplish Vinaceous (xliv.) to Rocellin Purple (xxxviii.) ; when expanded Daphne Red 
to Tourmaline Pink to Pale Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) without, Argyle Purple (xxxvii.) to 
Daphne Red (xxxviii.) within. Clusters pyramidal, somewhat open, medium size. 
The flowers suggest those of an old form and their color is interesting. 

Crampel Lemoine, Cat. no. 143, 24 (1899), " Fleurs enormes, a lobes tout a fait cuculles, 
lilas bleuatre, centre blanc, dans le genre d'un Phlox Drummondi." — Havemeyer in 
Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 1899 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. Mr. E. Lemoine informs me that this was named for Paul Crampel, a 
French explorer, killed in central Africa. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1900). 
Flowers single, large; corolla-lobes cucullate, broader above the middle, pointed at apex, 
saucer-shaped; tone pale; color in bud Eupatorium Purple to Laelia Pink (xxxviii.); 
when expanded Light Pinkish Lilac on white without, Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvii.) 
with white markings on corolla-lobes and at throat within. Clusters open, showy, 
handsome. 

Croix de Brahy C. Morren in Belg. Hort. 1. 419 (1850), "Le thyrse est d'une delicatesse 
extreme, large du bas, ni effile, ni pendant. Les fleurs plus petites, mais plus mignonnes 
que celles des types, sont remarquables par leur belle forme, plutot en entonnoir qu'en 
sous-coupe (hypocraterimorphe) ; le fond du coloris est un rose clair et tendre, mais a 
chaque extremite des divisions, en haut, se dessine en s'effacant graduellement une belle 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 283 

teinte azuree et le rebord de ces divisions porte un lisere d'un pourpre vif," asLilas Croix 
de Brahy; iv. 67, t. XL fig. 2 (1854), as Lilas Croix de Brahy. — Gartenflora, 111. 60 
(1854). — Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 495 (1864). — Wochenschr. 
Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. viii. 88 (1865). — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 141 (1880), as 
crux de Brahy and as Lilas commun croix de Brahy. — A. Leroy, Cat. 1887, 26, as Lilas 
Crux Brahy. — E. Morren and A. De Vos, Index Bibliog. Hort. Belg. 555 (1887). 

Morren states that this was obtained by Brahy-Ekenholm, an amateur grower of 
Herstal, near Liege, Belgium, by crossing Charles X. and Noisette [= Noisettiana alba]. 
He waited three years to assure himself that the form was fixed and in 1853 gave it for 
propagation and distribution to Augustin Wilhelm, a nurseryman of Clausen, Luxemburg, 
Belgium. 

[K. Koch] (Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. xn. 43, 1869) writes: "Endlich 
nennen wir die neueren Sorten Croix de Brahy und Victoria, wo die rosafarbenen Bluthen 
sich durch einen weissen Stern auszeichnen." 

Doubtless the form Croix de Broby listed by Ellwanger and Barry (Cat. no. 2, 43, 
1867-1868) and by Parsons (Cat. 1889, 49) is a misnomer. It seems probable also that 
the form Gloire de Brahy listed by Froebel (Cat. no. 112, 22 [cir. 1890]) and described as 
"Lilarosa, grossdoldig" is the same. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 4, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 3003-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, 
small to medium in size, symmetrical; corolla-lobes cucullate on first expanding only; 
anthers hidden; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Neutral Red to Eupatorium 
Purple to Laelia Pink (xxxvm.); when expanded Tourmaline Pink (xxxvui.) without, 
Argyle Purple streaked with Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) on center of corolla-lobes within. 
Clusters compact, conical, medium size. 

D'Alger Dauthenay in Rev. Hort. 1898, 58, name only. 

Mentioned in a list of Common Lilac forms growing in the collection of Mons. Abel 
Chatenay at Vitry-sur-Seine, France. 

Dame Blanche Lemoine, Cat. no. 155, 29 (1903), "Thyrses tres divises, 5-6 grappes, 
fleurs blanches a 2 ou 3 corolles, boutons paille." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 

233 (1917)- 

Introduced in 1903 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Lemoine in 1905; no. 
51 18 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, hose-in-hose, with 2 or 3 corollas, large; corolla-lobes 
broad, pointed at apex, sometimes slightly cucullate; color in bud Chalcedony Yellow to 
Pale Chalcedony Yellow (xvn.); when expanded white. Clusters well-filled, narrow- 
pyramidal, medium to large. Small leaves are frequently present at the base of the 
subdivisions of the inflorescence. 

Danton Lemoine, Cat. no. 179, 5 (191 1), "Thyrses larges et compacts, fleurs enormes, 
rondes, lie de vin pourpre, c'est une des varietes les plus rouges qui existent." — Have- 
meyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). — Wister in House and Garden, March, 1926, 172. 

Introduced in 191 1 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 



284 THE LILAC 

Wister mentions this form as a weak grower and says he does not recommend it. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1916). 
Flowers single, extra large, symmetrical; corolla-lobes cucullate, curling backward; tone 
dark; color in bud Auricula Purple (xxvi.);when expanded Magenta with occasional 
margins of Liseran Purple without, Magenta to Dull Magenta Purple (xxvi.) within. 
Clusters narrow, conical, open, medium to large. 

Darimonti Van Houtte, Cat. no. 165-LL, 18 (1875-1876), name only. — Baudriller, 
Cat. no. 43, 141 (1880), and as Lilas commun de Darimont, name only. — Simon-Louis, 
Cat. 1886-1887, 58, name only. — D6trich6, Cat. 1893-1894, 16, name only. 

Dr. Darimont is said to have been the producer of the Lilac Dr. Lindley. E. Morren 
(Belg. Hort. xxvni. 175, 1878) notes that a Mons. Libert-Darimont originated the form 
Azurea plena while C. Morren (Clusia, 173, 1852-1854) refers to its producer as Libert, 
a horticulturist of Liege, Belgium. All these names probably apply to the same individual. 
Possibly the Lilac Darimonti was named in honor of this grower, or it may have been 
used as a corresponding name for one of the plants originating with him. 

Dark Blue Transon, Cat. 1875-1876, 49, as Syringa dark blue, name only; 1880-1881, 
66, as Syringa Dark blue, name only. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), name only, as 
Dark Blue and as Lilas commun Dark bleu. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1886-1887, 58, name 
only. — Spath, Cat. no. 76, 122 (1889-1890), "Bl. gross, hellblau, Rispe lang, locker." — 
Waterer, Cat. [cir. 1893], 31. 

It is not stated whether the flowers are single or double. See Additions. 

Decaisne Lemoine, Cat. no. 176, 31 (1910), "Thyrses moyens, fleurs bleu azure clair, 
plante tres florifere et boutonnant facilement." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 

(1917)- 

Introduced in 1 910 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 

productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1914). 

Flowers single, large; corolla-tube slender; tone intermediate; color in bud Deep Purplish 

Vinaceous (xxrv.) to Eupatorium Purple (xxxvin.) ; when expanded Argyle Purple to 

Purplish Lilac on Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvu.) without, Eupatorium Purple (xxxvin.) 

to Argyle Purple (xxxvu.) within. Clusters somewhat pyramidal, open, medium to 

large. 

Decorative Farr, Cat. "Better Plants," 1922-1923, 58, name only. 
"The Plant Buyers Index" (94, 1927) notes such a form as for sale by the Blue Hill 
Nurseries, South Braintree, Mass. 
Unknown to me. 

De Croncels L. Leroy, Cat. 1876, 72, as Syringa de Croncels, name only. — Transon, 
Cat. 1876-1877, 55, as Gloire de Croncels, name only. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 143 
(1880), "Nouvelle variete a thyrse tres-volumineux; fleurs large, d'un rouge carmin nuance 
de pourpre." — Mohr in Rev. Hort. Beige Etr. vn. 84 (1882), ". . . excellente variete 
Lilas de Croncels, si riche et si parfume." — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885), as 
Gloire de Croncels. — L. Henry in Jardin, vm. 175 (1894), "Fleurs relativement tres 
larges, rouges purpurin vif avec centre ardoise; boutons rouge carmine. Thyrses grands 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 285 

et bien degages. Tres belle variete, bien distincte." — Van Geert, Cat. no. 169, 44 
(1896), as Gloire de Croncels. — Dauthenay in Rev. Hort. 1898, 58, as Gloire de Croncels. — 
Simon-Louis, Cat. 1900-1901, 67, "Lilas rougeatre," with single flowers. — Morel, 
Cat. 1906-1907, 88 (mentioned under rose or flesh colored varieties), as Gloire de Cron- 
cels. — Farr, Cat. "Hardy Plants, " [cir. 1913], 66, "Large panicles; bright red in bud; ex- 
panding lilac-red," with single flowers, as Gloire de Croncels. — Turbat, Cat. 1923-1924, 
84, "Red," with single flowers, as Croncels. 

Lemoine (Cat. no. 88, 24, 1881) attributes the form which he calls De Croncels to 
Baltet, as does Mohr (1. c). The Baltet nurseries are at Troyes (Aube), France. They 
were sometimes called the Grandes Pepinieres de Croncels. Mr. E. Lemoine wrote me 
on January 15, 1925, of the form De Croncels: "Evidemment le meme que Gloire de 
Croncels. Croncels est un faulbourg de Troyes ou se trouvent les pepinieres Baltet." 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Farquhar in 191 7; 
listed as Gloire de Courcels). Flowers single, medium size, unsymmetrical; tone inter- 
mediate; color in bud Deep Brownish Vinaceous (xxxix.) to Rocellin Purple with corolla- 
tube Eupatorium Purple (xxxvin.) ; when expanded Laelia Pink with margins of Pale 
Laelia Pink without, Eupatorium Purple (xxxvin.) within. Clusters open, pyramidal. 

De Humboldt Lemoine, Cat. no. 122, 15 (1892), "Thyrses tres volumineux, fleurs 
enormes, tr&s pleines, rose violace purpurin." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 

(1917)- 

Introduced in 1892 by the firm of V. Lemoine et flls, Nancy, France, and one of their 

productions. Havemeyer gives the date of introduction as 1891. See Banquise for the 

explanation of this difference in dates. 

Humboldt has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant 
Names" (486, 1923). The form Alexander Humboldt which they also list is unknown 
to me. A plant of the name growing in the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y., which was re- 
ceived from Lemoine in 1900, proved to be identical with De Humboldt as it grows in 
the Arnold Arboretum. 

Alexandre de Humboldt, listed as a name only by Transon (Cat. 1894-1895, 93), with 
single flowers, is probably the same. As 5. vulgaris Alexander von Humboldt, " rosaviolett, 
starkgefullt, " it appears in the catalogue, Gra.fl. zur Lippe'schen Baumschulen zu 
Dauban (1909, 43). 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken in June, 1900, from 
plant received from Lemoine in November, 1895; no. 3814-2 Am. Arb.). Flowers 
double, unsymmetrical, large, hose-in-hose, with stout buds; tone intermediate; color in 
bud Dahlia Carmine (xxvi.) to Eupatorium Purple (xxxvin.) ; when expanded Eupatori- 
um Purple to Laelia Pink to Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvin.) without, Chinese Violet to 
Lilac (xxv.) within. Clusters long, narrow, open, symmetrically filled. 

De Jussieu Lemoine, Cat. no. 119, 13 (1891), "Thyrses compacts et allonges, fleurs 
pleines, globuleuses, lilas bleuatre borde rose, boutons rouge." — Nicolas in Jardin, ix. 80 
(1895). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917), as Dr. Jussieu. 

Introduced in 1891 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. Havemeyer gives the date of introduction as 1890. See Banquise for the 
explanation of this difference in dates. 



286 THE LILAC 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1900). 
Flowers double, medium size; corolla-lobes unsymmetrical, broad or narrow; tone inter- 
mediate; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous (xliv.) to Eupatorium Purple to Tour- 
maline Pink (xxxviii.); when expanded Laelia Pink or Pale Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) 
without, Lilac or Mauvette or white marked with Light Lavender- Violet (xxv.) within. 
Clusters dense, pyramidal, medium size. 

Delepine William R. Prince, Cat. 1856-1857, 44, name only, as Syringa Dehpine, 
Lilac Delepine. — Van Houtte, Cat. no. 117, 12 (1867), name only; no. 165-LL, 18 
(1875-1876), as Delepine, name only. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), as Delepine, 
name only. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1887-1888, 58, name only; 1900-1901, 67, "lilas 
bleuatre, " with single flowers. — A. Leroy, Cat. 1887, 26, as Syringa, Lilas, Delepine. — 
Grosdemange in Jardin, vin. 119 (1894), "violet a reflet bleuatre," with single flowers, 
as Delepine. — Soc. Anonyme Hort. Calmpthout, Cat. no. 4, 45 (1902-1903), as De 
Lepine. 

Grosdemange mentions this form as exhibited by Simon-Louis Freres at the Societe 
nationale d'Horticulture de France on April 26, 1894. 

Mons. Kort, President of the Societe Anonyme Horticole de Calmpthout (successors 
to the Van Geert nurseries), wrote me on November 3, 1924, that this Lilac has single 
flowers, "rouge violace devenant tres fonce, fleur moyenne." 

De Louvain Dauvesse, Cat. no. 20, 24 (1855), as Lilas de Louvain, name only; no. 
24, 42 (1859), as Syringa De Louvain, De Louvain Lilac, name only. — Ellwanger and 
Barry, Cat. no. 2, 42 (1867-1868), "a very fine variety; a profuse bloomer; flowers 
light purple, very distinct," as Lilac, Syringa, De Louvain; 1900, 88, fig., "Flowers single, 
silvery pink, a distinct and beautiful shade; panicles large and very erect, showing off 
the individual flowers to good advantage," as Lovaniensis. — Van Houtte, Cat. no. 117, 
12 (1867), as Lovaniensis; no. 225-L, 43 (1887-1888), as Lovanensis. — Ellwanger in 
Horticulturist, 1875, 98, "A strong grower and profuse bloomer; flowers light purple and 
very distinct." — Transon, Cat. 1880-1881, 66, as Syringa Lavanensis. — Baudriller, 
Cat. no. 43, 143 (1880), " Variete bien distincte par ses fleurs rose came passant au blanc," 
as Lilas commun de Louvain and as Lovanensis. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 
(1885), as L ovanens is. — Spath, Cat. no. 69, 115 (1887-1888), as Lovaniensis. — L. 
Henry in Jardin, vm. 175 (1894), "Fleurs mauve rose clair, coloris tres frais, palissant 
et devenant presque blanc a la fin de la floraison," with single flowers, as De Louvain 
(Lovanensis). — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1900-1901, 67, "carne," with single flowers, as 
Lovanensis. — Dunbar in Gard. Mag. 1. 233 (1905), "silvery pink," with single flowers, 
as Lovaniensis. — Muskauer Baumschulen, Haupt-Katalog, 1910, 37, as Louvainiensis 
Hort. — Felix and Dykhuis, Cat. [cir. 1925], 26, "s" [= einfach = single], "zart lila, " 
as Syringa, Flieder, Lavoniensis. 

L. Henry (Jardin, vm. 174, 1894) objects to the confusion caused by the use in nursery 
catalogues of Latin titles without specific name; among such he cites Lovanensis. 

Louvain has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant 
Names" (486, 1923). 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June, 1900, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 2929-1 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 287 

medium size, symmetrical; corolla-lobes cucullate; anthers visible but not prominent; 
tone pale ; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac to Light Vinaceous- 
Lilac (xliv.) ; when expanded Laelia Pink with margins of Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvm.) 
without, Pale Lilac tinged with Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvii.) within. Clusters large, 
open, somewhat conical, numerous. 

De Miribel Lemoine, Cat. no. 155, 31 (1903), "Grands thyrses allonges et serres, 
fleurs moyennes, violet bleuatre, revers blanchatres." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. 
xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1903 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Lemoine in 1905; no. 5123 
Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, symmetrical, medium to large; corolla-lobes broad, rounded 
at apex; tone dark; color in bud, corolla-lobes Dahlia Carmine (xxvi.) to Light Perilla 
Purple (xxxvii.), corolla- tube Manganese Violet (xxv.); when expanded, corolla- tube 
same, corolla-lobes Argyle Purple with margins of Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvii.) without, 
Manganese Violet shaded with Chinese Violet (xxv.) within. Clusters medium to large, 
open, narrow. 

De Saussure Lemoine, Cat. no. 152, 32 (1902), "Thyrses nombreux, fleurs moyennes, 
pleines, rouge violace purpurin, boutons rouge pourpre, revers mauve clair." — Bellair 
in Rev. Hort. 1906, 324. — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1902 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1905). 
Flowers double, large; corolla-lobes sometimes opening at a right angle to corolla-tube, 
sometimes twisted or curling inward; tone dark; color in bud Dahlia Carmine (xxvr.); 
when expanded Eupatorium Purple with margins of Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvni.) without, 
Bishop's Purple (xxxvii.) marked with Laelia Pink (xxxvni.) or white on inner corolla- 
lobes within. Clusters long, pyramidal, well-filled, showy and somewhat variegated in 
appearance. 

Desfontaines Lemoine, Cat. no. 164, 28 (1906), "Grands thyrses compacts, fleurs 
moyennes a. deux ou trois corolles emboitees, lilas mauve, teinte violette de Parme." — 
Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1906 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. Havemeyer gives the date of introduction as 1905. See Banquise for the 
explanation of this difference in dates. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (received from Holm Lea, Brookline, Mass., in 
April, 1913; no 17,580 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, large; corolla-lobes opening at a 
right angle to corolla-tube, outer lobes broad, inner lobes narrow, pointed at apex; tone 
intermediate; color in bud Neutral Red to Deep Hellebore Red to Eupatorium Purple 
(xxxvni.) ; when expanded Chinese Violet to Lilac (xxv.) or Light Lobelia Violet within, 
Argyle Purple to Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvii.) without. Clusters open, large. 

Deuil d'Emile Galle Lemoine, Cat. no. 158, vni. (1904), "Gros thyrses compacts, 
formes de trois ou quatre rameaux, fleurs enormes, doubles ou pleines, a. larges lobes 



288 THE LILAC 

ronds, imbriques et cuculles, mauve carmine teinte d'analine, boutons purpurins." — 
Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 321. — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxii. 383 (1907). — 
Havemeyerin Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1904 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Lemoine in November, 
1905; no. 5127 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, large; corolla-lobes rounded or pointed at 
apex; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Hellebore Red to 
Laelia Pink (xxxvin.) ; when expanded, the outer corolla Tourmaline Pink with margins 
of Pale Laelia Pink without, the inner corolla Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvm.) or white with- 
out, Light Lavender- Violet or Light Mauve (xxv.) marked with much white within. 
Clusters open, interrupted, large. There is a noticeable contrast between the dark buds 
and the paler open flowers, as well as, when the flowers are expanded, between the dark 
outer and the pale inner corollas. 

Diderot Lemoine, Cat. no. 189, 22 (1915), "Enormous erect panicles, 1 foot long, large 
round flowers, claret purple, very free." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). — 
Duffy in Garden and Home Builder, May, 1927, fig. (p. 258), 310. 

See Plate cxxv. 

Introduced in 191 5 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in October, 1918; no. 7914 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, extra large; corolla- 
lobes cucullate with pronouncedly raised margins forming a small pocket; anthers visible; 
tone dark; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to Magenta (xxvi.); when expanded Light 
Perilla Purple with margins of Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvii.) without, Dull Magenta 
Purple (xxvi.) to Bishop's Purple (xxxvii.) within, solid colors. Clusters extra long, 
narrow, interrupted. A fine example of the modern showy, single-flowered, dark Lilac. 
The flowers appear to be darker within than without and leaves are often present at the 
base of the subdivisions of the inflorescence. It blooms somewhat late. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 189. 

Dr. Charles Jacobs Fl. Stepman-De Messemaeker, Cat. [1908], 2, "Tres grands 
thyrses allonges, rouge lie-de-vin. Arbuste de croissance vigoureuse dont les jeunes sujets 
boutonnent des les premieres annees de culture. Cette variete peut etre considered 
comme de tout premier ordre," as Docteur Charles Jacobs. — De Corte in Rev. Hort. 
Beige Etr. xxxiv. 207 (1908). — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxni. 351 (1908), as 
Docteur Charles Jacobs. 

Introduced in 1908 by the firm of Fl. Stepman-De Messemaeker, Brussels, Belgium; 
their catalogue states that this was a seedling resulting from a cross between the forms 
Dr. Lindley and Marie Legraye. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Stepman-De 
Messemaeker in 1914). Flowers single, large; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone dark; color 
in bud Dahlia Carmine to Schoenfeld's Purple (xxvi.) ; when expanded Magenta with 
margins of Liseran Purple without, Dull Magenta Purple (xxvi.) within. Clusters long, 
open. The pale margins of the lobes give a variegated appearance to the clusters. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 289 

Dr. Lindley Van Houtte in Fl. Serres, xiv. 237, t. 1481, t. 1482 (1861), "Void le plus 
beau des Lilas; ses magnifiques thyrses tres-denses, d'un purpurin brillant, depassant 
ceux de toutes les varietes connues, tant sous le point de vue de volume, des dimensions 
hors ligne de ces gigantesques bouquets, que sous celui de la perfection dans la forme 
des corolles, " as Lindleyi and as Lilas du Dr. Lindley. — A. Leroy, Cat. 1865, 
100, as Syringa Lindleyana and as Lilas de Lindley. — Horticulturist, 1874, 265. — L. 
Leroy, Cat. 1876, 72, as Syringa lindleyana. — Ottolander in Sieboldia, 11. 187 (1876). — 
Wiener Obst-Garten-Zeit. 1. 564 (1876). — Carriere in Rev. Hort. 1877, 359, as Docteur 
Lindley. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), as Lindleyana and as Lilas 
commun docteur Lindley. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 77 (1885). — E. Morren and 
A. De Vos, Index Bibliog. Hort. Belg. 556 (1887), as Lindleyi. — L. Henry 
in Jardin, vin. 175 (1894), as Docteur Lindley; in Jour. Soc. Hort. France, ser. 4, 11. 733 
(1901), as Docteur Lindley. — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896), as Doctor 
Lindley. 

Since the name Dr. Lindley is commonly used in referring to this form, to avoid con- 
fusion it has here been retained rather than the Latinized name Lindleyi used also by 
Van Houtte. 

Van Houtte states that this is a seedling obtained by Dr. Darimont [probably the 
Dr. Libert-Darimont who is said to have produced the form Azurea plena] and put in the 
market by the Van Houtte firm about 1859. Carriere writes later, apparently in igno- 
rance of this statement, that the origin of this Lilac is unknown; he thinks it is probably 
English and imported by Makoy of Liege, Belgium, a long time previous to the date at 
which he writes. He believes that it was Bertin the elder of Versailles who first intro- 
duced it to France, about 1864. 

The two plants whose descriptions follow both bear this name but are not the same 
in appearance and I am uncertain which is true to name. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 7, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 2975-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, 
symmetrical, medium to large in size; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep 
Hellebore Red to Daphne Red to Tourmaline Pink (xxxvin.); when expanded Tour- 
maline Pink to Laelia Pink marked with Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvin.) on margins without, 
Lilac (xxv.) within. Clusters compact, medium size. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Ellwanger and 
Barry in 1892). Flowers single, large; corolla-lobes cucullate, rounded at apex, sym- 
metrical; tone intermediate; color in bud Magenta (xxvi.); when expanded Eupatorium 
Purple to Laelia Pink (xxxvin.) without, Rose Purple marked with Pale Rose Purple 
(xxvi.) within. Clusters compact, pyramidal, medium size. The flowers appear to 
be darker without than within. 

Dr. Lyals Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 486 (1923), name 
only. 

A plant bearing this name was received at the Arnold Arboretum from Holm Lea, 
Brookline, Mass., in February, 1885, but has since disappeared. 

Mr. Rehder tells me that he based his list of Lilacs, used by Olmsted, Coville and 
Kelsey in the compilation of the "Standardized Plant Names" list, in part upon the 
Arnold Arboretum catalogue. I have found no mention of such a form elsewhere. 



290 THE LILAC 

Dr. Maillot Lemoine, Cat. no. 131, 12 (1895), "Lilas bleuatre clair, genre de President 
Carnot." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1895 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from grafts made February 13, 1897, 
from plant received from Lemoine in November, 1895; no. 3805-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers 
double, medium to large in size, with 2 corollas and additional lobes at throat; corolla- 
lobes broad, rounded, or pointed at apex, opening at a right angle to corolla-tube into a 
round flower; tone pale; color in bud Vinaceous-Lilac to Light Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) 
to Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) ; when expanded Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvin.) without, Mauvette 
(xxv.) turning to white within. Clusters long, narrow, interrupted, showy. A some- 
what late bloomer. 

Dr. Masters Lemoine, Cat. no. 140, x. (1898), "Thyrses longs de 30 centimetres, 
fleurs d'une grande legerete, parfaitement rondes, doubles, couleur lilacee, plus claire 
au centre." — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 321, fig. 132. — Moller's Deutsch.Gartn. -Zeit. 
xxii. 381 (1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1898 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken in June, 1900, from 
plant received from Lemoine in April, 1900; no. 4605-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double to 
semi-double, medium to large in size; corolla-lobes broad or narrow, pointed at apex; 
tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Hellebore Red to Tourmaline Pink (xxxviii.); 
when expanded, the outer corolla Pale Laelia Pink (xxxviii.), the inner corolla white 
without, white tinged with Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) within. Clusters long, narrow, 
open, showy. 

Dr. Nobbe Hort. according to Hartwig and Rumpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 560 
(1875), "Bliithen gross, von dem Bau der Bliithen des vorigen [Professor Stoeckhardt] 
zart-rosalila, mit weisslicher Sternzeichnung, in grossen, compakten Straussen von der 
Form der Rispen des Marly-Flieders. Von demselben Zuchter [Moritz Eichler of Chem- 
nitz]," as Doctor Nobbe Hort., and as Nobbe-Flieder. — Ottolander in Sieboldia, n. 
187 (1876). — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), as doctor Nobbe and as Lilas commun 
docteur Nobbe. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885). — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1886- 
1887, 58, as Docteur Nobbe. — Spath, Cat. no. 68, 114 (1887-1888), "helllila, fruhbl., 
sehr voll, Rispe kurz," as Docteur Nobbe. — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 380 (1892), as Doctor 
Nobbe. See Additions. 

It seems probable that this and the form Dr. Noble were originally the same but the 
descriptions are so slight as to be worthless for purposes of identification. However, the 
Lilac Dr. Nobbe as grown in the Arnold Arboretum is not the same as the Dr. Noble of 
the Rochester collection. See Dr. Noble. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 7, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 2942-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, 
small, symmetrical; corolla-lobes rounded at apex, cucullate; anthers visible but not 
conspicuous; tone pale; color in bud Light Russet-Vinaceous to Light Purplish- Vinaceous 
(xxxix.) to Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) ; when expanded Pale Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) without, 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 291 

white tinged with Pale Mauve (xxv.) within. Clusters open, abruptly pyramidal, 
medium to large, symmetrical. 

A form of Dr. Nobbe with variegated leaves is listed by Baudriller (Cat. no. 43, 142, 
1880) as S. vulgaris doctor Nobbe foliis maculatis and as Lilas commun docteur Nobbe 
a. feuilles maculees, "Feuilles completement maculees et poudrees; panachure bien 
constante, resistant parfaitement au soleil." 

Dr. Noble Dauvesse, Cat. no. 36, 46 (1872), as Lilas docteur noble, name only. — 
A. Waterer, Cat. 1872-1873, 36, name only. — Transon, Cat. 1887-1888, 77, name only, 
as Syringa Docteur Noble, name only. — Van Houtte, Cat. no. 225-L, 43 (1887), name 
only. — A. Leroy, Cat. 1887, 26, name only. — Van Geert, Cat. no. 169, 44 (1896), 
name only, as Docteur Noble. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1897-1898, 66, as Docteur Noble, 
with single flowers; 1900-1901, 67, "lilas fonce," with single flowers, as Docteur Noble. 

It seems probable that this and the form Dr. Nobbe are the same although the descrip- 
tions of both are so slight as to be worthless for purposes of identification. See the 
form Dr. Nobbe. See Additions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Dickson in 1892). 
Flowers single, small; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone pale; color in bud Light Russet- Vinace- 
ous (xxxrx.) to Laelia Pink (xxxviu..); when expanded Purplish Lilac with margins 
of Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvu.) without, Light Mauve marked with Pale Mauve (xxv.) 
within. Clusters open, medium to large in size. The pale margins give a somewhat 
variegated appearance to the clusters. Simon-Louis notes that this form is " lilas fonce " ; 
if this is correct the Rochester plant which is pale in tone is not true to name. 

Dr. Troyanowsky Lemoine, Cat. 149, vin. (1901), "Enormes panicules, plus larges 
que hautes, formant des touffes elegantes de fleurs bien degagees les unes des autres; 
celles-ci sont doubles ou pleines, en forme de jacinthe, d'une mauve bleuatre passant 
au lilas azuree." — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 321. — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. 
xxii. 382 (1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1901 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Dept. of Parks, Rochester, 
N. Y. in November, 1920; no. 10,588 Am. Arb.). Flowers double, unsymmetrical, 
medium to large; corolla-lobes narrow or broad, twisted; tone intermediate to pale; color 
in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.); when expanded, the outer 
corolla Argyle Purple, the inner corolla Light Pinkish Lilac without, Lobelia Violet to 
Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) often tinged at throat Lavender- Violet (xxv.) within. 
Clusters broad, full. 

Dr. von Regel Spath, Cat. 1883, 2, "Rispen sehr gross, freistehend, Knospen hellrot, 
Blumen innen schon hrmmelblau, in voller Bliithe bedeutend mehr blau als Syringa 
Eckenholm. Rispe freistehend." — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885), as Dr. 
Regel. — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896), as Doctor von Regel. 

Introduced in 1883 by the firm of L. Spath, Berlin, Germany, and one of their produc- 
tions; according to information supplied me by that firm in January, 1924, it was a 
chance seedling. 

The firm kindly sent me the first description in July, 1924. 



292 THE LILAC 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 15, 1895, 
from plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 2936-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers 
single, symmetrical, medium size; corolla-lobes cucullate; anthers conspicuous; tone 
intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Hellebore Red to Laelia Pink 
(xxxviii.) ; when expanded Pale Laelia Pink with margins of white without, Pale Laelia 
Pink (xxxviii.) marked with much white within. Clusters compact, medium size. 

Doyen Keteleer Lemoine, Cat. no. 131, x. (1895), "Thyrses gros, compacts et longs, 
fleurs irregulieres, rose giroflee pale; tres florifere. Cette variete qui se prete au forcage 
presente les thyrses les plus volumineux." — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 324. — Moller's 
Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 380 (1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1895 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Mr. E. Lemoine informs me that this was named for the horticulturist Keteleer of 
the firm of Thibaut and Keteleer of Sceaux, Seine, France, who died at an advanced 
age, — hence the designation Doyen. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from grafts made February 13, 1897, 
from plant received from Lemoine in November, 1895; no. 3816-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers 
double, unsymmetrical, medium to large; corolla-lobes pointed at apex, broad or narrow; 
tone intermediate; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.); 
when expanded Lilac to Pale Lavender- Violet (xxv.) to Pale Lobelia Violet within, Pale 
Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) without. Clusters compact, long, narrow. 

Due de Massa Lemoine, Cat. no. 161, vin. (1905), "Thyrses moyens, serres, droits, 
a 3 ou 4 branches, fleurs enormes, rondes, regulieres, imbriquees, violet clair a reflets 
purpurins, gros boutons pourpre." — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 383 (1907). — 
Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

See Plate cxxxi. 

Introduced in 1905 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y. in October, 1918; no. 7195 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, extra large, with 
two corollas and additional lobes at throat; corolla-lobes broad, pointed at apex, opening 
into a saucer-shaped flower; tone intermediate; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous 
(xliv.); when expanded, corolla-tube Lobelia Violet, corolla-lobes Lobelia Violet within, 
Argyle Purple (xxxvu.) marked with white without. Clusters large, broadly pyramidal, 
well-filled, with spreading subdivisions, showy, handsome. The flowers are somewhat 
globular in shape at first, then saucer-shaped, later the corolla-lobes open at a right angle 
to the corolla-tube and the flower looks rather flat. Occasionally they are single. A 
somewhat late-flowering form. 

Due d'Orleans Hort. according to Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 
495 (1864), name only. — Van Geert, Cat. no. 169, 44 (1896), name only. 

In a letter of November 3, 1924, Mr. Kort, President of the Societe Anonyme Horticole 
de Calmpthout, successors to Van Geert, wrote me that this form has single flowers, 
"Rose pale, fleur moyenne." 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 293 

Duchesse de Brabant Duvivier in Jour. Hort. Pratique Belgique, ser. 2, v. 241, t. 
xrx. fig. 2 (1861), as Lilas Duchesse de Brabant. — E. Morren and A. De Vos, 
Index. Bibliog. Hort. Belg. 556 (1887). 

According to Duvivier this was produced by the amateur Brahy-Ekenholm, and 
from the same crossings which produced the forms Croix de Brahy, Ekenholm, "d'azur 
a fleur double" [= Azurea plena], Charlemagne and Princesse Camille de Rohan. They 
were the result of crossing the Lilacs Charles X. and Noisette [= Noisettiana alba]. 
The colored plate was painted by Ed. Van Mark of Liege. 

Duvivier tells us that it was raised from seed sown in 1852 and first flowered in i860 
at which time it received a "medaille de vermeil" from the Societe royale des Conferences 
horticoles of Liege, but has never before been described or figured ; a special commission 
of this Society gave it its name. 

Duvivier describes it thus: "Le port et le feuillage du Lilas Duchesse de Brabant 
n'oflrent rien de remarquable; ils sont ceux du Lilas ordinaire. Le thyrse, delicat et 
d'une forme conique allongee, est mieux fourni que celui du Lilas Louise-Marie; les 
fleurs ont le tube regulier et le limbe parf aitement dessine ; les divisions de celui-ci, aigues 
a leur extremite, sont fort peu recourbees sur les bords, ce qui le distingue du Lilas Eken- 
holm, dont il se rapproche d'ailleurs sous plusieurs rapports. Le colons est un lilas 
rose clair, avec une legere teinte blanchatre qui contribue puissamment a lui donner un 
cachet de distinction tout particulier. . . ." 

I have found no other mention of this form except in the "Index Bibliographique 
de l'Hortus Belgicus" of E. Morren and A. De Vos, which is a "Catalogue methodique 
des plantes ornementales qui ont ete decrites, figurees ou introduites en Belgique de 
1830 a 1880." 

Duchesse de Nemours Oudin, Cat. 1845-1846, 6, name only, as Lilas duchesse de 
Nemours. — Ellwanger and Barry, Cat. no. 2, 42 (1867-1868), "Very light purple, 
distinct, fine." — Baumann, Cat. no. 159, 38 (1879). — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 
(1880). — Parsons, Cat. 1889, 49. 

J. Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883) mentions this form, as a name 
only, under his S. vulgaris q. hybrida hort., od[er] Ambfroise] Verschaflelt. 

Duchesse d'Orleans Oudin, Cat. 1845-1846, 6, name only, as Lilas duchesse d'Or- 
leans. — Van Houtte, Cat. no. 117, 12 (1867), name only. — Baumann, Cat. no. 159, 38 
(1879), name only. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), name only. — Dauvesse, Cat. 
no. 56, 22 (1892), name only. — E. M. in Garden, Lxxvn. 217 (1913) "Is quite a new light 
blue," with single flowers. 

If the Lilac mentioned in "The Garden" is the same as that listed by Oudin it is 
certainly not a new form. 

J. Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883) mentions this form, as a name 
only, under his S. vulgaris q. hybrida hort., od[er] Amb[roise] Verschaflelt. 

Duplex O. Kuntze, Taschen-Fl. Leipzig, 82 (1867), "Bth. monstros mit 2 Blkr." 
Probably scarcely different from the form Plena. Not to be confused with S. ckinensis 

f. duplex, first introduced by Lemoine (Cat. no. 134, rx. 1896) as Syringa Varina 

Duplex. 



294 THE LILAC 

Eburonensis Van Houtte, Cat. no. 165-LL, 18 (1875-1876), name only. — Baudriller, 
Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), name only. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1910-1911, 54, "Lilas rose," 
with single flowers. 

Mr. E. Lemoine wrote me on January 16, 1925: "Les Eburons etaient un peuple 
de la Gaule Belgique, habitant les bords de la Meuse, dans la region de Liege. Un certain 
nombre de Lilas ont ete obtenus a Liege." 

L. Henry (Jardin, viii. 174, 1894) objects to the confusion caused by the use in nursery 
catalogues of Latin titles without specific name; among those so used he mentions Eburo- 
nensis. 

Edith Cavell Lemoine, Cat. no. 190, 24 (1916), "Big pyramidal thyrses, large regular 
imbricated flowers, pure milk white, buds suffused cream and pale sulphur." — Have- 
meyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 191 6 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in April, 1918; no. 7916 Am. Arb.). Flowers double, extra large; corolla- 
lobes long, narrow, expanding to a right angle with corolla-tube or curling, occasionally 
broad, pointed or rounded at apex; color in bud Dull Green- Yellow to Chalcedony 
Yellow to Light Chalcedony Yellow (xvn.); when expanded white. Clusters open, 
spreading, long or extra long, showy. Leaves are frequently present at the base of the 
subdivisions of the inflorescence. A fine double-flowered white Lilac. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 190. 

Edmond About Lemoine, Cat. no. 170, vm. (1908), "Vari6te extremement florifere; 
dont tous les rameaux sont termines des la taille de 80 centimetres par de gros bouquets 
serres de fleurs pleines, a lobes arrondis et imbriques, lilas mauve tendre, boutons 
mauve." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1908 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1910). 
Flowers semi-double or double, unsymmetrical, large; tone pale; color in bud Light 
Vinaceous-Drab (xlv.) to Purplish Lilac to Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvri.); when ex- 
panded Light Pinkish Lilac tinged with Purplish Lilac without, Pale Lobelia Violet 
tinged with Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) with occasional markings of white on corolla- 
lobes and at throat within. Clusters dense, large, broad-pyramidal. 

Edmond Boissier Lemoine, Cat. no. 164, 30 (1906), "Thyrses tres volumineux, larges 
fleurs violet petunia fonce, passant au violet metallique; c'est un des Lilas les plus 
fonces." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1906 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. Havemeyer gives the date of introduction as 1905. See Banquise for the 
explanation of this difference in dates. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Holm Lea, Brookline, 
Mass., in 1913; no. 15,657 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, unsymmetrical, extra large; 
corolla-tube short; corolla-lobes narrow or broad, pointed or rounded at apex, occa- 
sionally cucullate; tone dark; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to Magenta (xxvi.); when 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 295 

expanded Light Perilla Purple with margins of Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.) without, Dull 
Magenta Purple (xxvi.) to Chinese Violet (xxv.) with occasional margins of Liseran 
Purple (xxvi.) within. Clusters long, open, broad-pyramidal, large. 

Edouard Andre Lemoine, Cat. no. 146, xi. (1900), "Thyrses larges, fleurs irregulieres, 
rose tendre, boutons plus fonces, variete hative." — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 323. — 
Grignan in Rev. Hort. 1907, 14, t. fig. 2. — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 382 
(1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). — Kache in Gartenschonheit, 
v. t. (opp. p. 81) (1924). 

Introduced in 1900 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1907). 
Flowers double, hose-in-hose, medium size; corolla-lobes pointed, tone pale; color in 
bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous (xliv.) to Tourmaline Pink (xxxvrn.); when expanded 
Tourmaline Pink to Laelia Pink without, Laelia Pink (xxxvm.) to white within; the 
flowers appear to be paler within than without. Clusters open, pyramidal, much branched. 

Ekenholm C. Morren in Belg. Hort. iv. 67, t. xi. fig. 1 (1854), "Le thyrse est long, 
haut, fourni, produisant souvent a la base des thyrses supplementaires au nombre de 
cinq, ce qui donne alors une inflorescence d'une richesse et d'une magnificence telles qu'un 
seul bout de branche devient a lui seul un bouquet. Les fleurs se pressent sur ce thyrse 
sans se deformer; leur tube est regulier et leur limbe parfaitement dessine. Les divisions 
sont arrondies a. leur extremite, en forme de cuilleres relevees sur les bords en faisant la 
navicule ou le batelet. Le coloris est un lilas azure des plus delicats, chatoyant d'une 
teinte de rose et imitant ces soieries appelees vulgairement gorges de pigeon. La gorge 
ou entree du tube est plus foncee. Le parfum de cette plante est d'une suavite extra- 
ordinaire," as Lilas Ekenholm. — Gartenflora, m. 60 (1854). — Kirchner in Petzold and 
Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 495 (1864), as Eckenholm. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 42, 142 
(1880). — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885). — E. Morren and A. De Vos, Index 
Bibliog. Hort. Belg. 555 (1887). 

C. Morren states that this was obtained by Brahy-Ekenholm, an amateur grower of 
Herstal, near Liege, Belgium, and named for Madame Brahy whose maiden name was 
Ekenholm. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Spath in 1892). 
Flowers single, medium size; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone intermediate; color in bud 
Deep Hellebore Red to Eupatorium Purple (xxxvm.); when expanded Eupatorium 
Purple (xxxvni.) without, same with margin's of white on corolla-lobes within. Clusters 
medium size, well-filled, pyramidal. The white margins give a somewhat variegated 
appearance to the clusters. 

Elihu Root Dunbar, Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers semi-double, i 3 /i6 inches 
across, azure lavender, cluster dense, late." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 334 Dunbar) of Gilbert, 
named by him in 1923. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers double, large, with two 
corollas and additional lobes at throat; corolla-lobes broad, pointed at apex, curling 



296 THE LILAC 

inward; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Light Perilla Purple (xxxvn.) to Deep 
Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac to Pale Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) without, Pale 
Lobelia Violet (xxxvn.) within. Clusters narrow, pyramidal. 

Emile Gentil Lemoine, Cat. no. 189, 22 (1915), "Good thyrses of large, full, and 
imbricated flowers, bright cobalt blue, a very rare shade among lilacs." — Havemeyer 
in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 191 5 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Dept. of Parks, Rochester, 
N. Y. in May, 1923; no. 11,843 Am. Arb.). Flowers double, extra large; corolla-tube 
short, stout; corolla-lobes broad, pointed at apex, or occasionally rounded, expanding 
at a right angle to corolla-tube into a round flower; tone pale; color in bud, corolla- tuba 
Dark Lavender to Light Vinaceous-Purple to Deep Vinaceous-Lavender (xliv.), corolla- 
lobes Purple-Drab (xlv.); when expanded Dull Lavender (xliv.) to white without, 
Light Dull Bluish Violet to Deep Lavender (xxxvi.) marked with white at throat and 
on corolla-lobes within. Clusters dense, broadly pyramidal, short, showy. The corolla- 
lobes have a somewhat streaked appearance. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 189. 

Emile Lemoine Lemoine, Cat. no. 113, xix. (1889), "Bouquets formes normalement 
de 4 a 6 thyrses roses reunies et divergents, leur donnant une largeur de 25 centimetres 
au moins, fleurs bien grandes, d'une belle forme globuleuse, couleur extremement tendre, 
d'un beau rose lilace de jacinthe." — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 322. — Moller's Deutsch. 
Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 379 (1907). — Ellwanger and Barry, Cat. 1908, 59, t.; 1900, 87, fig. 
(p. 86). — Barry in Horticulture, x. 499, fig. (1909). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 

2 33 i 1 ^)- 

Introduced in 1889 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 

productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 5, 1895, from 

plant received from Lemoine in November, 1889; no. 3452-1 Am. Arb.). Flowers 

double, medium size; corolla-lobes broad, rounded or pointed at apex, curling inward; 

tone pale; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous (xliv.) to Tourmaline Pink to Laelia 

Pink (xxxviii.); when expanded Laelia Pink to Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvin.) without, 

Mauvette (xxv.) to Pale Lobelia Violet tinged with Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvn.) 

within. Clusters pyramidal, widely branched, open, large. 

Emil Liebig Spath, Cat. no. 69, 4 (1887-1888), "Mit sehr breiten und schon gebauten 
Rispen. Knospen dunkelviolettrosa im Aufbliihen heller. Centrum in's Blauliche 
ubergehend. Spitzen der Blumenblatter ein lebhaftes Aussehen. Geruchmandelartig." — 
Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896). 

Introduced in 1887 by the firm of L. Spath, Berlin, Germany, and one of their produc- 
tions; according to information kindly supplied me by the firm in January, 1924, this 
was a chance seedling. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June n, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 2998-1 Am. Arb.). Flowers double, 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 297 

medium to small in size ; tone intermediate to pale ; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous 
(xliv.); when expanded Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvn.). Clusters compact, small. 

Erzherzog Johann Hort. according to Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 
495 (1864), "Rispe sehr grossblumig, lilaroth; Blumen mittelgross, stark gerundet." — 
Jager, Ziergeholze, 530 (1865). — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885). — Spath, Cat. 
no. 79, in (1890-1891), "hell-lila-rosa." — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 380 (1892). 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Spath in 1892). 
Flowers single, small; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone pale; color in bud, corolla-tube Deep 
Dull Lavender (xliv.), corolla-lobes Grayish Olive (xlvi.) ; when expanded Dull Lavender 
(xliv.) without, Light Lobelia Violet with markings of Pale Lobelia Violet (xxxvti.) 
within. Clusters open, broadly pyramidal. 

Etna Lemoine, Cat. no. 200 bis, 7 (1927), "Broad panicles of medium-sized regular 
flowers, deep claret purple, late; probably the most approaching to red," with single 
flowers. 

Introduced in 1927 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 200 bis. 

Etoile de mai Lemoine, Cat. no. 161, 29 (1905), "Thyrses moyens, fleurs grosses, 
demiglobuleuses, cocardeau violet a. revers blancs, produisant l'effet d'une panachure." — 
Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 324. — Grignan in Rev. Hort. 1907, 15, fig. 3, t. fig. 1. — 
Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxh. 383 (1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 

233 (1917)- 

Introduced in 1905 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 

productions. Havemeyer gives the date of introduction as 1904. See Banquise for the 
explanation of this difference in dates. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1907). 
Flowers double, hose-in-hose, large; tone dark; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to Schoen- 
feld's Purple (xxvi.) ; when expanded, the outer corolla Dahlia Carmine to Schoenfeld's 
Purple, the inner corolla white tinged with Magenta (xxvi.) or all white. Clusters nar- 
row, interrupted, with flowers somewhat fascicled. The inner corollas, which are almost 
white, appearing through the dark outer corolla, give a curiously variegated appearance 
to the cluster and make this one of the most distinct of all the forms of the Common Lilac. 

Extra White Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 486 (1923), name 
only. 

Grafts bearing this name were received at the Arnold Arboretum from Holm Lea, 
Brookline, Mass., in February, 1885, but the plant has disappeared. 

Mr. Rehder tells me that he based his list of Lilacs, used by Olmsted, Coville and 
Kelsey in the compilation of the "Standardized Plant Names" list, in part upon the 
Arnold Arboretum catalogue. I have found no mention of such a form elsewhere. 

Farrionensis Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 486 (1923), name only. 
Farrion has been adopted as approved common name by " Standardized Plant Names" 
(486, 1923). I have found no mention of this form in any other work. 



298 THE LILAC 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (received as grafts from the Dept. of Parks, 
Rochester, N. Y., in April, 1905; no. 5476 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, medium to small 
in size, corolla-lobes narrow, pointed at apex, cucullate; tone pale; color in bud Hellebore 
Red to Rocellin Purple to Tourmaline Pink to Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) ; when expanded 
Laelia Pink to Pale Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) without, Pale Lavender- Violet (xxv.) marked 
with white at throat within. Clusters narrow, small, open. The habit of this form is 
distinct, somewhat dwarfed, with spreading, stout branches. 

This form is growing in the Rochester collection also ; its description in their catalogue 
reads: "Flowers single, lilac, loose flowered clusters, 'pretty'." 

Flore-albescente Klinge, Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24 (1883), as^. albescente. 

Johannes Klinge, assistant-director of the Botanic Garden of the University of Dorpat, 
Russia, mentions this Lilac as growing in the Botanic Garden; he describes the flowers 
as smaller and paler [than S. vulgaris] but thinks this appearance possibly occurs on very 
old shrubs. 

A doubtful plant. 

Francisque Morel Lemoine, Cat. no. 134, ix. (1896), "Thyrses tres longs, fleurs 
enormes, forme de jacinthe double, rose cendre bleuatre." — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.- 
Zeit. xxn. 381 (1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1896 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1900). 
Flowers double, large, unsymmetrical ; corolla-lobes narrow, curling or opening at a right 
angle to corolla- tube; tone intermediate; color in bud Cinnamon-Drab (xlvi.) to Vinace- 
ous-Lilac (xltv.) to Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) ; when expanded Laelia Pink to Pale Laelia 
Pink (xxxviii.) without, Lilac to Mauvette (xxv.) marked with white on inner corolla- 
lobes and at throat within. Clusters long, narrow, open, pyramidal. 

Frau Bertha Dammann Spath, Cat. 1883, 3, "Herrlich rein-weisse Sorte mit enorm 
grossen Bliitenrispen, die sich durch dankbares Bliihen schon als ganz junge Pflanze aus- 
zeichnet und sehr zu empfehlen ist." — Dieck, Haupt-Verzeichen. Zoschen, Nachtr. 1. 
27 (1887), as Bertha Dammann. — Van Houtte, Cat. no. 240-w, 44 (1890), as Berths Dam- 
mann. — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896). — Ellwanger and Barry, Cat. 1892, 
100, t., as Frau Dammann (p. 96). — Amer. Florist, xn. 1077, fig. (1897). — Nicholson, 
HI. Diet. Gard. Suppl. 696 (1900), as Frau Dammann. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1900-1901, 
67, as Alba Bertha Dammann, with single flowers. — Muskauer Baumschulen, Haupt- 
Katalog, 1910, 36, as Bertha Dammann, "bluht weiss." — Spath-Buch, 1920, 222, as 
Frau Berta Dammann. See Additions. 

Introduced in 1883 by the firm of L. Spath, Berlin, Germany, and one of their produc- 
tions; according to information kindly supplied me by the firm in January, 1924, this 
was a chance seedling. The firm also sent me the first description. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Ellwanger and 
Barry in 1892). Flowers single, medium size; corolla-lobes cucullate; corolla- tube long; 
color in bud Chrysolite Green to Deep Sea-foam Green (xxxi.); when expanded white. 
Clusters unusually open, large, narrow-pyramidal. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 299 

Frau Wilhelm Pfitzer Kanzleiter in Gartenwelt, xni. 129, t. fig. 2 (1909), "Frau Wil- 
helm Pfitzer, mit einfachen Blumen, ist von zarter, feiner lilarosaer Farbung. Die Bliiten 
vereinigen sich zu pyramidalen, schlanken Rispen, welche die Pflanze iiberaus zahlreich 
iiberdecken, so dass diese Sorte durch die Reichbliitigkeit, verbunden mit zarter, feiner 
Farbung, besonders schmuckvoll wirkt, auch wegen der reinen Farbe ein beliebtes Binde- 
material liefern wird." — Pfitzer, Hauptkatalog, 1910. 

Mr. Paul Pfitzer wrote me on November 7, 1924, that this form is the result of a 
cross made by his grandfather, Mr. Wilhelm Pfitzer, in his private garden at Stuttgart. 
It was chosen when in flower from among many other seedlings, then was transplanted 
and carefully observed for years. Mr. Pfitzer was aided in its choice by several well- 
known Lilac specialists. Mr. Paul Pfitzer tells me that it first appeared in the firm's 
Hauptkatalog for 1910 which I have not seen. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Stepman-De 
Messemaeker in 1912). Flowers single, large, symmetrical; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone 
pale; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Light Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.); when 
expanded Dull Lavender (xliv.) to Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvn.) without, Mauvette 
(xxv.) marked with white within. Clusters long, open, broad-pyramidal. 

Fiirst Biilow Spath, Spath-Buch, 1920, 222, fig., "Die neue Sorte gleicht dem bekann- 
ten Flieder Andenken an Ludwig Spath' in der Grosse, edlen Gestalt und aufrechten 
Haltung der Rispen und in der Grosse schonen Form und dunkeln Farbe ihrer Bliiten. 
Doch der Farbenton ist noch dunkler als der Mutterblute: aufbliihend dunkelpurpur, 
dann iibergehend in ein wundervolles, leuchtendes Violett. Der hubsch geschlossene 
und rund sich bauende Strauch bringt seit Jahren eine reiche Fulle grosser, bis 23 cm. 
langer Rispen und ist der spateste Bliiher meines reichhaltigen Sortiments von Formen 
der Syringa vulgaris," with single flowers. — A. Purpus in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. 
xxxvi. 63, fig. (192 1). 

Introduced in 1920 by the firm of L. Spath, Berlin, Germany, and one of their produc- 
tions; according to information supplied me by the firm in January, 1924, this was pro- 
duced by crossing the forms Andenken an Ludwig Spath ( Q ) and Hyazinthenflieder ( 6 ) . 

Fiirst Liechtenstein Spath, Cat. no. 69, 4 (1887-1888), " Jeder Strauss mit imposant 
grossen, pyramidal geformten Rispen. Knospen rothlich mit seidenartigem Glanze. 
Bliithe sehr gross, blaulich rosa, nach der Mitte zu in weisslich blau iibergehend; ausserst 
dankbar bliihend In vollster Bliithenpracht ist der Strauch eine Leuchte in der reichen 
Gruppe der Flieder zu nennen," as Fiirst Lichtenstein. — Spath-Buch, 1920, 222. 

Introduced in 1887 by the firm of L. Spath, Berlin, Germany, and one of their produc- 
tions; according to information supplied me by the firm in January, 1924, this was a 
chance seedling. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 6, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 3000-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, 
large, symmetrical; corolla-lobes broad, cucullate; anthers visible; tone intermediate to 
pale; color in bud Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) to Light Perilla Purple (xxxvn.); when 
expanded Argyle Purple tinged with Light Pinkish Lilac without, same within but with 
markings of Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvn.) at throat. Clusters open, large, pyramidal. 
This is a fine, single-flowered, pink Lilac. 



300 THE LILAC 

Garteninspector Gireoud Muskauer Baumschulen, Haupt-Katalog, 1910, 37, name 
only. 

In a letter of July 2, 1924, Mr. H. L. Spath supplied the following information in 
regard to a form Hermann Gireoud which is presumably the same: "The variety Her- 
mann Gireoud, a seedling received from a gentleman of that name, has never been used, 
being not judged good enough for dissemination." 

Gaudichaud Lemoine, Cat. no. 155, 30 (1903), "Genre President Carnot, thyrses 
plus longs, fleurs plus doubles, floraison tardive." — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 323. — 
Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 1903 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. Mr. E. Lemoine informs me that it was named for the French botanist, 
Charles Gaudichaud-Beaupre (1780-1854). 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in 1918; no. 17,371 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, symmetrical, extra large; 
corolla-lobes pointed at apex; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep Purplish 
Vinaceous (xliv.) to Argyle Purple to Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.) ; when expanded Laelia 
Pink to Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvui.) without, Light Mauve to Pale Mauve (xxv.) with 
much white near throat within. Clusters long, symmetrical, large. Leaves are often 
present at the base of the subdivisions of the inflorescence. 

Geant des Batailles Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. vm. 88 (1865), name 
only. — Van Houtte, Cat. no. 117, 12 (1867), name only. — A. Leroy, Cat. 1868, 99, as 
Syringa geant des batailles, name only. — Ottolander in Sieboldia, 11. 187 (1876), "elijkt 
veel op de varieteit Aline Mocqueris; de kleur der bloem is evenwel iets lichter wijn- 
rood." — Baumann, Cat. no. 159, 38 (1879). — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), 
"Superbe, a thyrses et a fleurs enormes, d'un beau rouge pourpre; une de nos meilleurs 
varietes," as elevatus dimicatio and as Lilas commun Geant des Batailles. — Dieck, 
Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885). — Spath, Cat. no. 69, 115 (1887-1888), "roth." — L. 
Henry in Jardin, vm. 175 (1894), "Fleurs grandes, ardoise rougeatre clair, revers 
pourpre; boutons carmine vif. Inflorescences fortes et bien fournies." — Rehder in 
Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xiv. 206 (1899), "rosafarben in Blaulila iibergehend," 
with single flowers; in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vi. 3298 (1917), "bluish lilac." — Baltet, 
Cat. 1900-1901, 28, "lilas carmine vif," with single flowers. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1900- 
1901, 67, "Lilas rougeatre," with single flowers. 

Mentioned in the " Wochenschrif t des Vereines zur Beforderung des Gartenbaues in 
den Kdniglich Preussischen Staaten fur Gartnerei und Pflanzenkunde" edited by K. 
Koch who possible wrote the article. It, with others, is referred to as an old form: 
"welche sich seit langer Zeit schon Anerkennung erworben haben." 

Geheimrat Heyder Spath, Cat. 3, 1883, "Bukett sehr gross, Knospen rot, Blume 
nach dem Aufbrechen hellblau, im Zentrum weiss, reichbliihend," as Geheimrath 
Heyder. — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896). — Muskauer Baumschulen, 
Haupt-Katalog, 1910, 37, "Blume rot, in Aufbrechen hellblau, im Zentrum weiss, reich- 
bliihend," as Geheimer Rath Heyder Hort. — Spath-Buch, 1920, 233, "Schon geformte, 
grosse Rispen. Von den zart hellila-farbenen Bluten heben sich die roten Knospen 
reizend ab." 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 301 

Introduced in 1883 by the firm of L. Spath, Berlin, Germany, and one of their produc- 
tions; according to information supplied me by the firm in January, 1924, this was a 
chance seedling. 

The firm kindly sent me the first description in July, 1924. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 5, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 3006-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single > 
symmetrical, medium size; corolla-lobes cucullate, broad, rounded at apex; anthers visible; 
tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Hellebore Red to Tour- 
maline Pink (xxxvm.) ; when expanded Argyle Purple tinged with Light Pinkish Lilac 
without, Light Lobelia Violet marked with Pale Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) within. Clusters 
open, medium size. 

Sometimes found in French nursery catalogues as Conseiller Heyder. A plant of this 
name growing in the collection at Rochester, N. Y., and which was received from Transon 
in 1892, appears to be the same upon comparison with the plant just described. 

Geheimrat Singelmann Spath, Cat. no. 69, 4 (1887-1888), "Grosse dichte Strausse 
bildend; hellpurpurviolett wie Marlyensis, jedoch mit grossem, weissem Stern. Gleich- 
massig im Aufbliihen und sehr dankbar bluhend; stark und angenehm duftend," as 
Geheimrath Singelmann. — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896). — Muskauer 
Baumschulen, Haupt-Katalog, 1910, 37, as Geheimer Rat Singelmann. — Spath-Buch, 
1920, 223. 

Introduced in 1887 by the firm of L. Spath, Berlin, Germany, and one of their produc- 
tions; according to information kindly supplied me by the firm in January, 1924, this 
was a chance seedling. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 5, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 3004-1 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, 
symmetrical, medium size; corolla-lobes rounded at apex, cucullate; anthers visible; 
tone dark to intermediate; color in bud Neutral Red to Daphne Red to Tourmaline 
Pink (xxxvth.); when expanded Tourmaline Pink with margins of Pale Laelia Pink 
without, Eupatorium Purple (xxxvth.) to Hay's Lilac tinged with Light Pinkish Lilac 
(xxxvu.) within. Clusters long, well-filled, somewhat conical, large. 

The name of this form sometimes appears in French nursery catalogues as Conseiller 
Singelmann. A plant of this name growing in the Rochester collection and received 
from Transon in 1892 proved to be the same upon comparison with the plant just described. 

General Drouot Lemoine, Cat. no. 116, 9 (1890), "Fleurs tres grandes, violet vin 
rougeatre tres fonce." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 1890 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Stepman-De 
Messemaeker in 1914). Flowers single, large; corolla-lobes narrow; tone dark to inter- 
mediate; color in bud Perilla Purple to Light Perilla Purple (xxxvu.); when expanded 
Bishop's Purple with occasional margins of Light Pinkish Lilac without, Bishop's Purple 
(xxxvii.) marked with Mauve (xxv.) at throat within. Clusters narrow, open, long. 

General Elwell S. Otis Dunbar, Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers semi-double, 
azure lavender, very dense spikes." 



302 THE LILAC 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 323 Dunbar) of Gilbert, named 
by him in 1906. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers semi-double to double, 
extra large; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous (xliv.) 
to Eupatorium Purple (xxxvni.); when expanded Eupatorium Purple with occasional 
margins of Laelia Pink (xxxvni.) without, Bishop's Purple to Light Lobelia Violet 
marked with Pale Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) within. Clusters open, narrow-pyramidal, 
symmetrically filled. 

General Grant Dunbar according to Horticulture, xxvi. 35 (1917), name only; xxvh. 
534 (1918), "... single, with varying shades of porcelain lavender." — Dunbar, Litt. 
ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers single, 1 inch across, buds reddish lilac, pinkish lavender 
when fully open, clusters 6 to 7 inches long." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this form (no. 268 Dunbar) was of unknown parentage 
and was named by him in 1922. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers single, large; corolla-lobes 
narrow, pointed at apex, opening at a right angle to corolla-tube or curling backward; 
tone intermediate; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous (xliv.) to Tourmaline Pink 
(xxxvni.) ; when expanded Tourmaline Pink to Laelia Pink without, Eupatorium Purple 
(xxxvni.) within. Clusters open, widely branched. 

General Haig Dunbar according to Horticulture, xxvn. 534 (1918), "large clusters, 
single, pearly mauve." — Dunbar, Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers single, silvery 
lavender with a tinge of Cattleya rose when fully open, clusters very prominent and 
well built." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this form was of unknown parentage and was named 
by him in 1917. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers single, symmetrical, 
large ; corolla-lobes cucullate ; tone pale ; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Vinace- 
ous-Lilac (xliv.) to Tourmaline Pink (xxxvni.) ; when expanded Purplish Lilac to Light 
Pinkish Lilac without, Hay's Lilac to Pale Lilac (xxxvn.) marked with considerable 
white within. Clusters somewhat conical, dense. 

General Kitchener Dunbar in Florists Exch., September 22, 1923, 831, "Bears numer- 
ous dense thyrses of semi-double flowers, bluish lilac with a tinge of violet"; Litt. ined. 
October 3, 1923, "Flowers semi-double, % of an inch across, buds reddish lilac with a 
tinge of violet when fully open, spikes dense, 9 inches long, compound. Branching 
habit fairly compact." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 243 Dunbar) of Aline Moc- 
queris named by him in 191 7. There are 2 photographs of this form in the collection of 
the Arnold Arboretum (nos. 8891, 8892). 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers double or semi-double, 
large; corolla-lobes opening at a right angle to corolla-tube or curling backward; tone 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 303 

intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Eupatorium Purple (xxxviii.) ; 
when expanded Tourmaline Pink to Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvrn.) without, Chinese Violet 
to Lilac (xxv.) within. Clusters open, much branched. The flowers appear to be darker 
without than within. 

General John Pershing, new name. — Dunbar according to Horticulture, xxvn. 534 
(1918), "Semi-double, large blossoms, porcelain lavender in color," as General Pershing. — 
Dunbar in Florists Exch., September 22, 1923, 831, "with semi-double blossoms tinged a 
very delicate light azure lilac, flowers freely and is a remarkably beautiful lilac"; Litt. 
ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers semi-double, buds deep lilac, bluish lavender with a tinge 
of very delicate light azure lilac when fully open, % of an inch across. Branching habit 
medium, dense." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 240 Dunbar) of Aline Moc- 
queris, named by him in 191 7. There is a photograph of this form in the collection of 
the Arnold Arboretum (no. 6893). 

As introduced by Mr. Dunbar the name appeared as General Pershing; six years 
later Mr. Lemoine introduced a form bearing the same name. Mr. Dunbar's name has 
priority over Mr. Lemoine's but since two forms may not bear the same name I have, to 
distinguish them, changed Mr. Dunbar's name to General John Pershing. Although 
Mr. Lemoine's name should rightfully have been changed rather than Mr. Dunbar's it has 
seemed wise to let it stand since his plant is more widely cultivated. To avoid confusion 
between the two forms it is recommended that the distinction in name be observed. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers semi-double, medium 
size; tone pale; color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Daphne Red (xxxviii.); when ex- 
panded Tourmaline Pink (xxxviii.) to white without, Argyle Purple (xxxvu.) marked 
with white at throat within. Clusters open, much branched. The flowers appear to 
be paler without than within and the clusters somewhat variegated. 

General Pershing Lemoine, Cat. no. 198, 20 (1924-1925), "Double flowers of a quite 
unusual size, broad lobes, of a rich purplish violet, with paler reverses, big purple buds, 
late; an improvement on the handsome variety Charles Sargent." 

Introduced in 1924 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

In 1 91 8 the late Mr. John Dunbar introduced a form General Pershing. As noted 
under Mr. Dunbar's form, and for reasons there stated, I have changed his name to 
General John Pershing, despite the fact that his name had priority over that of Mr. 
Lemoine's. To avoid confusion it is recommended that the distinction in name be 
observed. 

Notes on plant in collection of T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, N. Y. (plant received 
from Lemoine in 1924). Flowers double, unsymmetrical, sometimes hose-in-hose, 
sometimes single except for a curled lobe at throat; corolla-lobes broad or narrow, ex- 
tremely curled, sometimes cucullate; tone intermediate; color in bud Eupatorium Purple 
to Tourmaline Pink (xxxviii.); when expanded, the outer corolla-lobes Tourmaline 
Pink with markings of Eupatorium Purple and of white, the inner Pale Laelia Pink 
(xxxviii.) without, all lobes Purplish Lilac marked with Light Pinkish Lilac and with 



304 THE LILAC 

Ageratum Violet (xxxvu.) within. Clusters extremely long, well filled, with long sub- 
divisions near the base; these are held erect and the cluster appears compact. The 
inner corolla-lobes, which are pale without, curl over, and give a pale look to the center 
of the flower and a variegated appearance to the entire cluster. A showy form. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 198. I have retained 
the French accents as they undoubtedly appeared in the original. 

General Schmidt Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), name only. — Dieck, Haupt- 
Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885), name only, as General Schmidt. 

General Sheridan Dunbar according to Horticulture, xxvu. 534 (19 18), "Semi- 
double, white, erect clusters." — Dunbar in Florists Exch., September 22, 1923, 381, 
fig., "Produces freely numerous large clusters of pure white flowers. The individual 
blossoms are not large as in some double flowering white Lilacs but the clusters stand 
out boldly"; Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers semi-double, not large but are occa- 
sionally super-imposed on each other somewhat like a hose-in-hose, white, primrose 
clusters good size. Branching habit inclined to be thin." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 274 Dunbar) of Princess Alex- 
andra named by him in 191 7. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers double, large, hose-in- 
hose; corolla-lobes rounded at apex; color in bud Absinthe Green to Chrysolite Green to 
Deep Sea-foam Green (xxxi.); when expanded white. Clusters long, narrow with 
ascending subdivisions. 

General Sherman Dunbar according to Horticulture, xxvi. 35 (191 7), name only; 
xxvu. 534 (1918), "... single, with varying shades of porcelain lavender." — Dunbar 
in Florists Exch., September 22, 1923, 831, "... has immense, many shouldered upright 
clusters of single flowers, of which the color might be described as creamy lavender. We 
consider this perhaps one of the most beautiful Lilacs in cultivation;" Litt. ined. October 
3, 1923, "Flowers single, % of an inch across, deep lavender in bud, creamy lavender 
lilac when fully open with faint tinge of porcelain blue in the center, spikes 3 to 4 com- 
pound, well formed. Branching habit compact." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 225 Dunbar) of Marlyensis 
pallida, named by him in 191 7. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Dept. of Parks, Rochester, 
N. Y., in November, 1922; no. 11,420 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, symmetrical, large; 
corolla-lobes broad, rounded at apex, cucullate; tone pale; color in bud Vinaceous-Lilac 
(xliv.) to Purplish Lilac (xxxvu..); when expanded Purplish Lilac to Light Pinkish 
Lilac without, Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) marked with much white at throat within. 
Clusters open, symmetrical, large. 

Georges Bellair Lemoine, Cat. no. 146, xn. (1900), "Plante tres florifere, thyrses 
larges et compacts, fleurs grandes d'une forme parfaite giroflee vineux, boutons cocar- 
deau." — Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 322. — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 382 
(1907). — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 305 

Introduced in 1900 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Holm Lea, Brookline, 
Mass., in April, 1913; no. 17,372 Am. Arb.). Flowers double, large, tone intermediate; 
color in bud Indian Lake (xxvi.) to Argyle Purple to Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.); when 
expanded Argyle Purple turning to Light Lobelia Violet within, Purplish Lilac on Light 
Pinkish Lilac (xxxvu.) without. Clusters medium to large, interrupted, broad-pyram- 
idal. 

George W. Aldridge Dunbar, Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers single, 7 / 8 to 
18 /i6 of an inch across, mauve tinted violet, dense clusters." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 218 Dunbar) of President 
Massart, named by him in 1923. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers single, large, sym- 
metrical ; corolla-lobes cucullate ; tone intermediate ; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous 
to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.); when expanded Eupatorium Purple with margins of Pale 
Laelia Pink (xxxvm.) without, Argyle Purple (xxxvu.) within. Clusters somewhat 
conical, open. 

Gigantea Ellwanger and Barry, Cat. no. 2, 43 (1867-1868), "Very large spikes of 
flowers of a dark bluish purple, rich foliage. ..." — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), 
and as Lilas commun Geant. — Dieck, Haupt-Verzeichn. Zoschen, Nachtr. 1. 28 (1887). 

Ellwanger and Barry state that this is "One of our seedlings." 

Giant has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant Names" 
(486, 1923). 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Ellwanger and 
Barry in 1892). Flowers single, large; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone dark; color in bud 
Dahlia Carmine to Schoenfeld's Purple (xxvi.); when expanded Eupatorium Purple 
(xxxvui.) with margins of Purplish Lilac (xxxvti.) without, Chinese Violet (xxv.) 
within. Clusters open, large, narrow. The pale margins of the corolla-lobes give a 
slightly variegated appearance to the clusters. 

Gigantea de Marly Baumann, Cat. no. 159, 38 (1879), name only. 
Whether this was distinct from the Marly Lilac [= S. vulgaris var. purpurea] is 
uncertain. No mention of this form has been found elsewhere. 

Gilbert Lemoine, Cat. no. 179, 37 (191 1), "Thyrses enormes, fleurs grandes, bien 
rondes, lilas bleuatre." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 191 1 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in April, 1918; no. 7918 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, large to extra large; 
corolla-lobes broad, pointed at apex, cucullate, with a pronounced hook, opening at a 
right angle to corolla- tube ; anthers scarcely visible; tone intermediate; color in bud 
Light Perilla Purple to Argyle Purple to Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.) ; when expanded Argyle 
Purple without, Saccardo's Violet turning to Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) within, solid colors 
both within and without. Clusters long, open, with wide-spreading subdivisions. 



306 THE LILAC 

Gloire de Bordeaux Wochenschr. Ver. Beford. Gartenb. Preuss. vin. 88 (1865), name 
only. 

Mentioned among new forms of the Common Lilac in an article entitled "Ueber 
einige, besonders neue Pflanzen der Laurentius'schen Gartnerei zu Leipzig." 

Gloire de Cass Blossom in Landscape Arch. April, 191 5, 140; October, 1923, 33. 

Mr. H. H. Blossom gives the following information in regard to this form which he 
cites as growing in the Arnold Arboretum: form, single; size of flower, medium; size of 
truss, medium; color of flowers, bluish light lavender; he also mentions dates of 
bloom. 

No plant of this name appears in the records of the Arnold Arboretum nor have I 
found it mentioned except by Mr. Blossom. 

Gloire de la Rochelle A. Leroy, Cat. 1865, 100, as gloria Rupellae and as Lilas 
commun g[loi]re de la Rochelfle], "lilas, mai." — Transon, Cat. 1875-1876, 49, as 
Syringa Gloire de la Rochelle. — Van Houtte, Cat. no. 165-LL, 18 (1875-1876). — L. 
Leroy, Cat. 1876, 72, as gloria rupellae. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), "Rose 
vif, passant au lilas; tres-beau, " as gloria Rupellae and as Lilas commun Gloire de la 
Rochelle. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885). — Croux, Cat. 1886-1887, 89, as 
Gloria Rupellae. — Van Geert, Cat. no. 169, 45 (1896). 

To avoid confusion the name Gloire de la Rochelle, which is commonly used for this 
form, has been retained rather than the Latinized name Gloria Rupellae. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 10, 1905, 
from plant raised from cuttings received from Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y., in July, 
1902 ; no. 5479-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, small to medium size, symmetrical; corolla- 
lobes narrow, cucullate; anthers hidden; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Neutral 
Red to Eupatorium Purple to Tourmaline Pink (xxxviii.) ; when expanded Tourmaline 
Pink (xxxviii.) without, Argyle Purple marked with Saccardo's Violet near throat, to 
Pale Lobelia Violet marked with Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvii.) within. Clusters open, 
medium size. 

Gloire de Lorraine Lemoine, Cat. no. 74, ix. (1876), "Fleurs de la grandeur de celles 
du beau Lilas Gloire de Moulins, violet clair satine avec ceil blanc au centre. Cette 
variety, dont tous les rameaux sont floriferes, produit beaucoup d'effet." — Baudriller, 
Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880). — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885). — L. Henry in Jardin, 
vin. 175 (1894), "Fleurs grandes, rose lilace nuance hortensia; boutons roses. Inflores- 
cences fortes et compacts. Belle variete." — Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 652 (1896). 

Introduced in 1876 by the firm of V. Lemoine, Nancy, France, and one of their pro- 
ductions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Holm Lea, Brookline, 
Mass. in April, 1907; no. 5324 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, symmetrical, large; corolla- 
lobes broadest below the middle, tapering to an acuminate apex, slightly cucullate on 
first expanding; anthers visible; tone intermediate; color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to 
Eupatorium Purple to Tourmaline Pink (xxxviii.) ; when expanded Argyle Purple with 
margins of Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvii.) without, Light Mauve or Lilac (xxv.) marked 
with white near throat within. Clusters compact, medium size. A handsome form and 
a late bloomer in the Arboretum. 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 307 

Gloire de Moulins A. Leroy, Cat. 1865, 100, as Syringa Rothomagensis gloria Molinae 
and as Lilas Varin gloire de Moulins, name only. — Dauvesse, Cat. no. 36, 46 (1872), 
as Lilas Gloire de Moulins, name only. — L. Leroy, Cat. 1872, 84, as Syringa rhotomagen- 
sis (varin) gloria molinae, name only. — Hartwig and Rumpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 
561 (1875), "Diese Form besitzt unter den Syringen die schonsten Strausse und ent- 
wickelsten Blumen," and as Moulins-Flieder. — Ottolander in Sieboldia, n. 187 (1876), 
as Gloire des Molins. — Lavallee, Arb. Segrez. 168 (1877), as S. dubia var. Gloire de 
Moulins. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), "Magnifique variete a. thyrses volumi- 
neux, fleurs tres-grandes, d'une belle couleur rose vif lilace," as gloria Molinae and 
as Lilas commun gloire de Moulins. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885). — E. 
Lemoine in Jardin, vi. 152 (1892). — Hartwig, HI. Geholzb. 380 (1892), and as Fleider 
Ruhm von Moulins. — L. Henry in Jardin, vin. 175 (1894), "Fleurs rose lilace, nuance 
bleuatre. Inflorescences grandes et bien fournies"; xv. 281, fig. 135 (1901). — Rehder in 
Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xrv. 206 (1899), "blassrosa in Helllila iibergehend." — 
Gordon in Gardeners' Mag. fig. (p. 499) (1901). — Wilson in Gard. Mag. xxin. fig. 
(p. 155) (1916). — Spath-Buch, 1920, 223, "Rispe gross und gut geformt. Bliiten 
rosalila, Knospen zart rosa. Bluht friih auf." 

To avoid confusion the name Gloire de Moulins, which is commonly used for this 
form, has been retained rather than the Latinized name Gloria Molinae. 

By some this form was considered, wrongly, to be a variety of the hybrid S. chinensis. 
L. Henry notes this incorrect classification. 

This was one of the forms used by Mr. V. Lemoine to pollinize Azurea plena. See 
Azurea plena. 

Mr. E. Lemoine wrote me on January 16, 1925: "Cette variete a du £tre obtenue 
par un horticulteur de Moulins les Metz, peut-etre M. Lapied." I have been unable to 
obtain any reply from this source. 

In the catalogue of Van Geert (no. 169, 45, 1896) appears as a name only, a S. vulgaris 
Gloire de Toulon. The same form is listed in the catalogue of the Societe Anonyme 
Horticole de Calmpthout (no. 4, 45, 1902-1903) the successors to the Van Geert firm. 
Mr. Kort, the president of this firm, wrote me on November 3, 1894, that this is identical 
with the Lilac Gloire de Moulins; he describes it as "Boutons rouge brun, interieur rose 
lilace, fleur simple enorme." I have found no mention of such a name elsewhere. 

Possibly the form Triomphe de Moulins is identical with Gloire de Moulins. See 
Triomphe de Moulins. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 12, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 2978-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, 
medium size, symmetrical; corolla-lobes narrow, cucullate; anthers visible but not con- 
spicuous; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Eupatorium 
Purple to Tourmaline Pink (xxxvni.) ; when expanded Laelia Pink to Pale Laelia Pink 
without, white marked with Laelia Pink or Pale Laelia Pink (xxxvni.) within. Clusters 
open, conical, medium size. A fine, simple form. 

Gloire de Versailles Felix and Dykhuis, Trade letter, July 25, 1924, name only; Cat. 
[dr. 1925], 26, "dunkel lila," with single flowers. 

In a letter of September 1, 1925, the firm of Felix and Dykhuis of Boskoop, Holland, 
wrote me as follows: "... Gloire de Versailles [originated with] Moser fils Nurseries, 



308 THE LILAC 

Versailles, France." A letter from Moser et fils, dated October 6, 1925, states how- 
ever: "... nous vous faisons savoir que nous n'avons pas du tout cree de lilas des 
varietes que vous indiquez, ni d'aucune autre variete du reste. Nous ne pouvons done 
pas vous donner le renseignement que vous nous demandez et nous exprimons tous nos 
regrets." 

Possibly the same as the old form Versaliensis. 

Glory of Mt. Hope Ellwanger and Barry, Cat. no. 2, 43 (1867-1868), "Flowers very 
delicate, deep red shaded with violet; truss very compact." — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 
142 (1880), and as Lilas commun Gloire de Mount Hope. 

Ellwanger and Barry state that this is one of the firm's seedlings which was to be 
offered for sale in the autumn of 1868. Introduced with the firm's other forms Sanguinea 
and Coerulea superba. 

Mount Hope was the name of the Ellwanger and Barry nurseries at Rochester, 
N. Y. 

Godron Lemoine, Cat. no. 170, 30 (1908), "Fleurs enormes, doubles ou pleines, lilas 
bleuatre, a centre eclaire de blanc." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1908 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. Havemeyer gives the date of introduction as 1907. See Banquise for the 
explanation of this difference in dates. 

The form of the Common Lilac Godroy listed by Nash (Jour. N. Y. Bot. Gard. xx. 
235, 1919) as a name only is probably a misnomer, according to Mr. Boynton of the N. Y. 
Botanical Garden (Litt. ined. October 25, 1924). Syringa Gordon listed by Turbat (Cat. 
1910-1911, 59) as "(double) enormous flowers, bluish lilac, with centre lighter white" 
is, from the description, a misnomer for this form. 

Mr. E. Lemoine informs me that this was named for the ex-director of the Jardin 
Botanique of Nancy, and author of the "Flore de Lorraine." 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1910). 
Flowers double or semi-double, large; corolla-lobes frequently curling; tone intermediate; 
color in bud Neutral Red to Eupatorium Purple (xxxvm.); when expanded Argyle 
Purple on Light Pinkish Lilac without, Saccardo's Violet streaked with Pale Lobelia 
Violet (xxxvii.) within. Clusters open, much branched. 

Goliath Van Houtte, Cat. no. 130, 252 (1869-1870), name only. — Dauvesse, Cat. 
no. 36, 46 (1872), as Lilas Goliath, name only. — A. Waterer, Cat. 1872-1873, 36, name 
only. — Transon, Cat. 1876-1877, 55, as Syringa Goliath, name only. — Baudriller, Cat. 
no. 43, 142 (1880), name only. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885), name only. — 
Spath, Cat. no. 69, 115 (1887-1888), name only. — Dippel, Handb. Laubholzk. 1. 113 
(1889), "purpurrot bluhende, mit sehr grossen Rispen." — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 380 
(1892). — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1900-1901, 67, "rouge violace," with single flowers. — 
Rehder in Bailey, Stand. Cycl. Hort. vr. 3298 (1917), "Purplish lilac," with single 
flowers. — Spath-Buch, 1920, 223, "Grosse, verzweigte Rispe mit purpur lilafarbenen 
Bluten und roten Knospen." 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Spath in 1902). 
Flowers single, large; corolla-lobes slightly cucullate; tone dark; color in bud Neutral 
Red to Eupatorium Purple (xxxvm.) ; when expanded Eupatorium Purple with margins 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 309 

of Pale Laelia Pink without, Eupatorium Purple (xxxviii.) within. Clusters long, 
pyramidal. 

Grand-Due Constantin Lemoine, Cat. no. 131, x. (1895), " Thyrses compacts, fleurs 
tres grandes, serrees, couleur uniforme, lilas cendre, plante excellente pour le forcage." — 
Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 323. — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 380 (1907). — 
Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1895 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Holm Lea, Brookline, 
Mass., in April, 1913; no. 17,373 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, large to extra large, un- 
symmetrical; corolla-lobes irregular in form, rounded or pointed at apex; tone intermedi- 
ate to pale; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous (xliv.); when expanded Argyle 
Purple to Purplish Lilac without, Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) within. Clusters compact, 
large, showy. The flower clusters are frequently produced from as many as three pairs 
of buds on the same branchlet. 

Grandiflora Audibert, Cat. 1831-1832, 51, and as Lilas commun a. grandes fleurs, 
name only. — Oudin, Cat. 1845-1846, 25, as grandiflorus, name only. — Parsons, Cat. 
1846, 38, as Syringa grandiflora, and as Large flowering Lilac, name only. — Ellwanger 
and Barry, Cat. no. 2, 1855-1856, 9, as Syringa grandiflora and as Large flowering Lilac, 
name only. — William R. Prince, Cat. 1856-1857, 44, as Syringa grandiflora and as Large 
flowering Lilac, name only. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1886-1887, 58, name only. — Nichol- 
son, 111. Diet. Gard. 111. 537 (1887), "Flowers red, large." 

Bailly (Rev. Hort. 1859, 538) in writing of the form Rouge de Trianon states that it 
was obtained from S. vulgaris grandiflora or "gros rouge de Trianon." Whether the 
latter name was commonly used for this form is uncertain. Bosse (Vollst. Handb. Blumen- 
gartn. 111. 461, 1842) mentions S. vulgaris grandiflora Hort., as a synonym of S. vulgaris 
flore rubro major, which he identifies with the Lilas de Marly [= S. vulgaris var. pur- 
purea]. Baumann (Cat. 1846, 15) calls Syringa grandiflora the Lilas Charles X. Wil- 
liam Miller (Diet. English Names Plants, 76, 1884) gives as a synonym of Charles X., 
S. vulgaris var. grandiflora. Possibly the "gros rouge de Trianon" and Charles X. were 
the same. But the name grandiflora was undoubtedly applied by nurserymen of the 
day to any form of the Common Lilac and of its white or purple varieties which they 
considered to be superior, and has little significance. William Prince (Cat. 1829, 51) 
calls his S. vulgaris grandiflora the Great white flowered Lilac and is probably referring 
to the form Alba grandiflora. The frequent usage of this adjective is evidenced by the 
names Rosea grandiflora, Rubra grandiflora and Purpurea grandiflora. 

In the catalogue of Audibert (181 7, 23) is listed a S. vulgaris a grandes fleurs, or Lilas 
double. If the name applies to this form it is the only reference where the flowers are 
mentioned as double. 

The Lilac Grandiflora is a doubtful plant. It seems probable that the name was 
applied, in the references given, to a Lilac with single flowers, of dark or intermediate 
color tone and was possibly used indiscriminately as a corresponding name for any one 
of a number of very similar Lilacs such as Charles X., Rubra insignis, Rubra major, as 
well as for the Marly Lilac, here considered to be identical with 5. vulgaris var. purpurea. 



310 THE LILAC 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883) lists a S. vulgaris h. grandiflora 
hort., which he notes is cultivated at Riga according to Wagner's catalogue. 

Guizot Lemoine, Cat. no. 137, 23 (1897), " Variete precoce, teint du Syringa Lemoinei, 
bouquets plus compacts et plus gros." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1897 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken in 1902 from plant 
received from Spath in November, 1900; no. 4340-2 Arn. Arb.). Flowers semi-double, 
medium size, unsymmetrical; corolla-lobes pointed at apex; tone intermediate; color in 
bud Tourmaline Pink (xxxvni.) to Argyle Purple (xxxvn.); when expanded Argyle 
Purple to Purplish Lilac without, Lobelia Violet to Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvn.) within. 
Clusters compact, medium size, numerous. 

Henri Martin Lemoine, Cat. no. 182, 37 (1912), "Longs thyrses eriges, fleurs moy- 
ennes, doubles, imbriquees, lobes arrondis, lilas mauve clair, boutons carmines." — Have- 
meyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 191 2 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. Havemeyer gives the date of introduction as 191 1. See Banquise for the 
explanation of this difference in dates. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1914). 
Flowers semi-double to double, large ; corolla-lobes expanding to a right angle to corolla- 
tube or curling inward; tone intermediate; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous (xxrv.) 
to Eupatorium Purple (xxxvni.); when expanded Argyle Purple to Purplish Lilac on 
Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvn.) without, Eupatorium Purple (xxxvni.) to Hay's Lilac 
(xxxvn.) marked with white within. Clusters long, dense, much branched, heavy. 

Henry Clay Dunbar, Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers single, Y% oi an inch 
across, large and showy, white." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 329 Dunbar) of A. B. Lamber- 
ton, named by him in 1923. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers single, large; corolla- 
lobes cucullate; color in bud Absinthe Green to Chrysolite Green to Sea-foam Green 
(xxxi.); when expanded between Sea-foam Green (xxxr.) and white. Clusters open, 
conical. 

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow Dunbar in Florists Exch. September 22, 1923, 831, 
"Bears clusters of semi-double flowers, light bluish lilac"; Litt. ined. October 2, 1923, 
"Flowers semi-double, 7 /$ of an inch across, buds deep reddish lilac, light bluish lilac 
when fully open, clusters 7 to 8 inches long." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 245 Dunbar) of Aline Moc- 
queris, named by him in 1920. There is a photograph of this form in the collection of 
the Arnold Arboretum (no. 8894). 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers double, large, hose-in- 
hose; corolla-lobes opening at a right angle to corolla- tube or curling; tone intermediate; 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 311 

color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) ; when expanded Pur- 
plish Lilac to Light Pinkish Lilac without, Ageratum Violet to Argyle Purple (xxxvn.) 
within. Clusters open, widely branched. 

Henry Ward Beecher Dunbar, Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers semi-double, 1^ 
inches across, pale lilac lavender, dense clusters." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 345 Dunbar) of Princesse 
Clementine, named by him in 1923. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers double, with 2 corollas 
and additional lobes at throat, extra large; corolla-lobes broad, cucullate at first, curling; 
tone pale; color in bud Eupatorium Purple (xxxvni.); when expanded Tourmaline 
Pink to Laelia Pink without, the outer corolla-lobes Eupatorium Purple within, the inner 
corolla-lobes Pale Laelia Pink or white marked with Eupatorium Purple (xxxvih.) 
within. Clusters long, narrow-pyramidal, irregularly filled. 

Herman Eilers Turbat, Cat. 1923-1924, 74, "Very distinct color rose," with single 
flowers. 

Fr. Meyer (Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xl. 376, 1925) mentions among forms of 
the Common Lilac: "Unsere hiesigen Treibgartnereien schatzen auch den Sinai-Flieder 
(= H. Eilers) der friiher in den Kulturen von Sinai, Frankfurt, gehiitet worden sein 
soil, aber eines Tages doch den Weg hinaus fand. Ich empfehle ihn aufs warmste auch 
fur das Freiland." 

On November 7, 1924, Mr. Paul Pfitzer wrote me as follows: "Die beiden Sinai- 
Flieder rot und rosa haben Sie nicht angefragt und will ich raten bei Herrn Friedr. Sinai, 
Frankfurt a. M., Eschenheimerlandstrasse anzufragen. Die beiden Sorten sind sehr 
ausgezeichnete Treibflieder." I have unfortunately been unable to obtain a reply from 
this source. 

Evidently the form Herman Eilers is identical, according to Meyer, with one at least 
of the Sinai Lilacs. In the wholesale catalogue (1923-1924, 26) of Smits, Naarden, near 
Amsterdam, Holland, is listed a form of the Common Lilac, Sinai, "rose," with single 
flowers. 

Notes on plant in the collection of T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, N. Y. Flowers 
single, small or medium in size, symmetrical; corolla-lobes sometimes slightly cucullate, 
broad, pointed at apex; tone pale; color in bud Vinaceous-Purple to Tourmaline Pink 
to Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) ; when expanded Pale Laelia Pink tinged with white without, 
Pale Laelia Pink with margins of Laelia Pink (xxxviii.) and marked with much white 
near throat within. Clusters long, narrow, open. 

Herycorthiana Hort. according to Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 
495 (1864), "Rispe eiformig, compact; Blumen gerundet, blauviolett, dunkel." — Jager, 
Ziergeholze, 530 (1865). — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 143 (1880). — Muskauer Baumschu- 
len, Haupt-Katalog, 1910, 37. See Additions. 

Mr. E. Lemoine wrote me on January 16, 1925, in reply to an inquiry concerning this 
form: "N'est pas Hericartiana? a rapprocher du nom de la fraise, Vicomtesse Hericart 
de Thury." 



312 THE LILAC 

Hippolyte Maringer Lemoine, Cat. no. 173, vin. (1909), "Larges thyrses compacts, 
surmontant tous les rameaux, grandes fleurs echevelees, mauve purpurin." — Have- 
meyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 1909 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Lemoine in 1910). 
Flowers double, large; corolla-lobes round; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Dull 
Indian Purple (xliv.) to Light Perilla Purple (xxxvu.) ; when expanded Argyle Purple 
to Purplish Lilac with margins of Light Pinkish Lilac without, Bishop's Purple to Light 
Pinkish Lilac (xxxvu.) to white within. Clusters long, open, narrow, subdivisions 
ascending. 

Hiram H. Edgerton Dunbar in Florists Exch. September 22, 1923, 831, "Has single, 
many-flowered thyrses, the individual flowers being large and of a deep bluish slate color; 
the variety has an excellent compact habit"; Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, " Flowers single, 
% of an inch across, reddish lilac in bud, bluish lilac to violet lavender when fully open, 
spikes 9 inches long and well formed. Branching habit compact and broad at top." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 216 Dunbar) of Lilarosa, named 
by him in 1919. He states in "The Florists Exchange" that he named it "as a compli- 
ment to the late Hiram H. Edgerton, for 14 years Mayor of the city of Rochester, a most 
excellent executive, and a staunch supporter of the policy of developing the public parks." 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers single, large; corolla- 
lobes cucullate; tone dark; color in bud Dahlia Carmine to Magenta (xxvi.); when 
expanded Magenta with margins of Pale Rose-Purple without, Dull Magenta Purple 
marked with Liseran Purple (xxvi.) within. Clusters open, widely branched. 

Hortulanus Witte Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in Stand. PI. Names, 486 (1923), 
name only. 

A plant bearing this name was received at the Arnold Arboretum in April, 1897, from 
Messrs. James Veitch and Sons, but has since disappeared. Mr. Rehder tells me that he 
based his list of Lilacs, used by Olmsted, Coville and Kelsey in the compilation of the 
" Standardized Plant Names " list, in part upon the Arnold Arboretum catalogue. I have 
found no mention of this plant elsewhere. 

Witte has been adopted as approved common name by "Standardized Plant Names." 

Hugo Koster Anonymous in Jour. Hort. Home Farmer, ser. 3, lxvi. 260 (March 13, 
1913), "This Lilac promises to become the most popular of its kind for early forcing. 
It was raised from seed as the result of cross hybridisation, but the parents are not known. 
It forces earlier than Mary Legraye and flowers equally as free as that variety. The 
individual flowers and the trusses are of abnormal size. It is a single-flowered variety, 
and the colour is a beautiful mauve; in all a great advance upon the favourites Charles 
X. and Souv. de Louis Spath. We understand the firm will not send out the stock until 
the autumn of 1914," as Lilac Hugo Koster. — Garden, lxxvii. 139 (March 15, 1913), 
"... a pale lilac, the flowers being of large size and well formed. In its natural flowering 
season in the open we imagine it would prove one of the most attractive and distinct," 
as Syringa (Lilac) Hugo Koster. — Florists Exch. xxxvi. 405 (August 23, 1913), ". . . 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 313 

shown on March 4 before the Royal Horticultural Society, London, by M. Koster & Son 
of Boskoop. ... It easily gained an Award of Merit." — Koster, Wholesale Trade List, 
1914-1915, "... The colour is bright mauve, flowers single and larger than Mary Le- 
graye; spikes and individual pips are very large; it is extremely sweet scented . . . 
when forced flowers as early as Mary Legraye . . . many people . . . call it: 'the 
Mauve Mary Legraye/ " as Lilac Hugo Koster; Koster Circular, "Syringa Hugo Koster 
(Le Marie Legraye bleu)," tt. (pp. 2, 3). 

Introduced in 19 14 by the firm of M. Koster & Sons, Boskoop, Holland. Mr. Koster 
wrote me on November 18, 1924: "We hybridised Marie Legraye, President Grevy and 
Souvenir de L. Spath, and out of this lot came Hugo Koster. We cannot exactly tell 
which were the parents." 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Kallen and Lunne- 
man in 1914). Flowers single, large; tone intermediate; color in bud Deep Hellebore 
Red to Eupatorium Purple (xxxvni.) ; when expanded Eupatorium Purple with margins 
of Laelia Pink without, Eupatorium Purple (xxxvm.) within. Clusters open, pyramidal, 
medium size. 

H. W. Sargent Parsons, Cat. 1903, 40, "Cherry red in bud; flowers a dark violet 
when open." It is not stated whether the flowers are single or double. 
I have not found this form mentioned elsewhere. 

Hyazinthenflieder Spath, Cat. no. 121, 132, fig. 195 (1906-1907), "Dieser hier gefal- 
lene, schone Samling erinnert in dem gefalligen Bau seiner schlanken Rispen lebhaft an 
Andenken an Ludwig Spath, von dem er auch abstammt, die Form der grossen Bluthen 
jedoch und ihr Farbenton — ein leuchtendes Purpurlila mit hellblauer Mitte, aus hellroter 
Knospe hervorkommend — fuhren so tauschend das Bild der Hyazinthenbliite vor Augen, 
dass der Name Hyazinthenflieder sich als der bezeichnendste von selbst aufdrangte." — 
Spath-Buch, 1920, 223, fig. 

Introduced in 1906 by the firm of L. Spath, Berlin, Germany, and one of their pro- 
ductions; according to information supplied me by the firm in January, 1924, it was 
obtained by crossing the forms M[ons]. Maxime Cornu ( 2 ) and Andenken an Ludwig 
Spath (6). 

Not to be confused with the hybrid Syringa hyacinthijiora, produced by Mr. V. 
Lemoine. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Barbier in 1908). 
Flowers single, large; corolla-lobes narrow, curling backward, cucullate; tone dark to 
intermediate; color in bud Vernonia Purple to Tourmaline Pink (xxxvni.); when ex- 
panded Purplish Lilac (xxxvn.) without, Chinese Violet to Lilac marked with Mauve 
(xxv.) at throat within. Clusters long, open, narrow, irregularly filled. 

Hybrida Oudin, Cat. 1841, 22, name only, and as Lilas commun hybride. — Baudriller, 
Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), name only, and as Lilas commun hybride. — Spath, Cat. no. 69, 
115 (1887-1888), "dunkel-lila, Knospen sehr dunkel." 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883) lists a S. vulgaris q. hybrida hort., 
od[er] Amb[roise] Verschaffelt. Under this he names many forms of the Common Lilac. 
Probably Hybrida is here used merely as a name for the so-called hybrids of garden origin 
but Klinge's reference is not clear. 



314 THE LILAC 

Or possibly a confusion with S. chinensis Willdenow; William R. Prince (Cat. 1844- 
1845, 7°) li sts a S. hybrida or Chinese Rouen hybrid Lilac, which is obviously Varin's 
hybrid. As noted in many instances the habit of omitting the specific name frequently led 
to such confusion. See S. chinensis. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 6, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 2945-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers single, 
unsymmetrical, medium size; corolla-lobes cucullate, with raised margins; anthers visible; 
tone intermediate; color in bud Deep Hellebore Red to Eupatorium Purple to Laelia 
Pink (xxxvin.); when expanded Purplish Lilac with margins of Light Pinkish Lilac 
without, Saccardo's Violet to Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) within. Clusters compact, medium 
size. The pale outer margins of the corolla-lobes form a marked contrast with the dark 
color of the flowers within and give a variegated look to the clusters. 

Intermedia Froebel, Cat. no. 90, 78 (1880), name only. 

Although listed by Froebel as a variety of the Common Lilac it is possible that this 
is a confusion with S. chinensis, called by Dumont de Courset Lilac media, and by "Le 
Bon Jardinier" Syringa media. See S. chinensis. 

Jacques Callot Lemoine, Cat. no. 74, x. (1876), "Thyrses volumineux, fleurs les plus 
grandes connues, surpassant en dimension celles du Lilas Gloire de Moulins, d'une teinte 
plus lilacee que ce dernier, thyrses compacts et eriges." — Carriere in Rev. Hort. 1877, 
280. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880). — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885). 

Introduced in 1876 by the firm of V. Lemoine, Nancy, France, and one of their pro- 
ductions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Ellwanger and 
Barry in 1892). Flowers single, large; corolla-lobes cucullate; tone pale; color in bud 
Deep Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.); when expanded Purplish Lilac 
to Light Pinkish Lilac without, Light Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) marked with white at 
throat within. Clusters open, large. 

James Booth A. Leroy, Cat. 1868, 99, name only, as Syringa James Booth. — Hartwig 
and Rumpler, Vilmorin's Blumengartn. 561 (1875), "Blumen himmelblau, dicht in kleinen 
Rispen zusammenstehend, welche einen langen Strauss bilden." — Baudriller, Cat. no. 
43, 142 (1880). — Parsons and Sons, Cat. 1890, 94. — Transon, Cat. 1894-1895, 94, as 
Syringa James Booth. — Simon-Louis, Cat. 1897-1898, 66, with single flowers; 1900- 
1901, 67, "Lilas bleuatre," with single flowers. See Additions. 

Listed in numerous other catalogues as a name only: Transon, 1886-1887, 76; Par- 
sons, 1889, 49, etc. At the present time it is listed by one nurseryman of the United 
States but the specimen sent me for examination had the appearance of a modern showy 
form and it seems improbable that it is true to name. 

Jan van Tol Anonymous in Het maandschrift der Nederlandsche Maatschappij 
voor Tuinbouw en Plantkunde, March 22, 1916, ". . . De bloemen van deze sering zijn 
zuiver sneeuwwit, van de zelfde tint als wij aan treffen bij de Roos Frau Karls Drushki; 
daarbij zijn zij groot en zeer goed van vorm. De bloempluimen zijn prachtig van vorm, 
los en toch goed gesloten, het hout is krachtig en lang. . . ." — De Tuinbouw, March 24, 
1916. — Onze Tuinen, April 28, 1916, "Marie Legray[e] was tot dusverre de mooiste 
witte sering, maar zij moet het tegen Jan van Tol afleggen. . . ." — De Veldbode, 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 315 

June 3, 1916. — Jan van Tol, Circular, "De nieuwe Sering Jan van Tol," 1-4, tt. (pp. 
2, 3) [cir. 1 91 6], "Zij onderscheidt zich van de bestaande seringen voornamelijk door 
haar zuiver witte kleur, door haar elegante nieuwe bloemvorm, door haar groote trossen, 
door haar reusachtige groote nagels en door haar bijzonder sterke en heerlijke geur. Als 
potcultuur geeft ze trossen van 25 c.M. en langer met hyacintvormige nagels van 30 a 
35 m.M., als regel . . . . " — Florists Exch. April 19, 1924, 1232. — Gard. Chron., ser. 3, 
lxxv. 153, fig. 63 (p. 157) (March 15, 1924), "... The flowers are pure white, single, 
fragrant, and developed in long trusses. It will no doubt prove a very valuable variety 
for garden decoration . . .," as Syringa Jan van Tol. — Garden, Lxxxvm. 192, fig. (p. 
191) (March 22, 1924), as Syringa Jan van Tol. — Gartenwelt, xxvni. 138 (1924). 

Raised by Mr. Jan van Tol of Boskoop, Holland. According to verbal information 
said to have been obtained from this grower, it was the result of crossing the forms Mme. 
Lemoine and Marie Legraye, the seed having been sown in 19 10. These two Lilacs, 
according to Fl. Stepman-De Messemaeker (Suppl. Gen. Cat. 1908, 2), were also the 
parents in the cross which produced the Lilac Princesse Clementine. 

According to a photograph of this form, issued by Mr. van Tol, where the flowers 
are said to be life-size, the individual blossom is iK inches in diameter; the flowers are 
single, with cucullate corolla-lobes, and the clusters 10 inches long and symmetrically 
filled. The plant in the Arnold Arboretum is too small to have yet produced a normal 
cluster. 

The citations given from the Dutch journals were taken from the circular issued by 
Mr. van Tol. 

This form is possibly more valuable for forcing than for garden usage. 

Jean Bart Lemoine, Cat. no. 113, xix. (1889), "Port tout special, tres longs thyrses 
groupes ensemble, tous les rameaux etant florifere; fleurs tres pleines, de forme irregu- 
liere, rose vineux, boutons carmin." — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit xxn. 379 (1907). — 
Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 1889 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 6, 1895, from 
plant received from Lemoine in November, 1889; no. 3456-1 Arn. Arb.). Flowers 
double, hose-in-hose, medium size; corolla-lobes pointed at apex; tone intermediate; color 
in bud, corolla- tube Bishop's Purple (xxxvn.), corolla-lobes Tourmaline Pink (xxxvin.); 
when expanded Laelia Pink (xxxvin.) without, Light Lobelia Violet to Pale Lilac tinged 
with Hay's Lilac (xxxvn.) within. Clusters open, medium size. 

Jean Mace Lemoine, Cat. no. 189, 21 (1915), "Broad compact panicles, irregular 
flowers, mauve fading to bluish, an early and very floriferous sort." — Havemeyer in 
Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 1915 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in October, 1918; no. 7919 Arn. Arb.). Flowers double, large, unsymmetri- 
cal; corolla-lobes broad or narrow, pointed at apex, expanding at a right angle to corolla- 
tube or curling backward; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep Purplish Vina- 



316 THE LILAC 

ceous to Vinaceous-Lilac to Light Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) ; when expanded Vinaceous- 
Lilac (xliv.) to Light Pinkish Lilac marked with white without, Purplish Lilac or Light 
Lobelia Violet (xxxvii.) marked with white within. Clusters long, large, well-filled, 
broadly pyramidal. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 189. 

Jeanne d'Arc Lemoine, Cat. no. 152, viii. (1902), "Panicules enormes, fleurs tres 
larges, pleines, a lobes arrondis, forme de giroflee, blanc pur, gros boutons blanc creme." — 
Bellair in Rev. Hort. 1906, 324. — Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxn. 383 (1907). — 
Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). — Wister in House and Garden, March, 
1926, 170, fig. (p. 73). — House and Garden's Second Book of Gardens, 161, fig. (1927). 

Introduced in 1902 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Dept. of Parks, Rochester, 
N. Y., in November, 1906; no. 5193 Am. Arb.). Flowers double, with two corollas and 
additional lobes at throat, unsymmetrical, large to extra large; corolla-lobes broad or 
narrow, rounded or pointed at apex, globular on first expanding, later opening into a flat 
round flower; color in bud Primrose Yellow to Marguerite Yellow (xxx.) ; when expanded 
white. Clusters long, narrow, open. Leaves are frequently present at the base of the 
subdivisions of the inflorescence. This is a showy, fine white form and blooms rather 
late in the Arnold Arboretum. 

Jeanne Morie Kelsey, Circular, "Lilacs on their own roots," [cir. 1922], 2, name only. 
The information given in regard to the origin of the form Andrew Dupont is applicable 
to this form also. See Andrew Dupont. 

Jeanne Saint-Didier Morel, Cat. 1906-1907, 88, name only. 

This is mentioned under rose or flesh-colored forms with single flowers. I have not 
found it appearing elsewhere. 

Joan Dunbar Dunbar, Litt. ined. October 3, 1923, "Flowers semi-double, large (% 
of an inch across) but somewhat star shaped, fleecy effect, white." 

Produced by John Dunbar of the Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. In a letter the 
late Mr. Dunbar informed me that this was a seedling (no. 343 Dunbar) of Thunberg, 
named by him in 1923. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. Flowers double, frequently with 
three corollas, large; corolla-lobes narrow, pointed at apex, curling; corolla-tube long, 
slender, conspicuous, holding the three corollas tightly together at throat; color in bud 
Chrysolite Green to Sea-foam Green (xxxi.); when expanded white. Clusters unusually 
open and widely branched. This form is distinct in appearance and Mr. Dunbar's use of 
the word "fleecy" to describe the effect of the flowers is well chosen. 

Jules Ferry Lemoine, Cat. no. 167, viii. (1907), "Larges thyrses volumineux, fleurs 
pleines, chiffonnees, mauve argente, boutons rose carmin produisant un agreable contraste 
avec les fleurs epanouies, variete tardive." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (191 7). 

Introduced in 1907 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from Holm Lea, Brookline, 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 317 

Mass., in April, 1913; no. 17,374 Am. Arb.). Flowers semi-double to double, large, 
unsymmetrical ; corolla-lobes rounded at apex, sometimes cucullate, curled; tone inter- 
mediate to pale; color in bud Perilla Purple to Light Perilla Purple (xxxvn.) to Tour- 
maline Pink (xxxviii.); when expanded Purplish Lilac marked with Light Pinkish Lilac 
(xxxvn.) without, Mauvette tinged with Lilac (xxv.) and marked with white within. 
Clusters open, irregularly filled, branching broadly at base. 

Jules Simon Lemoine, Cat. no. 170, viii. (1908), "Larges et hautes panicules com- 
pactes, tres grandes fleurs a lobes ronds, imbriques, lilas mauve passant a un Was azure 
d'un tres bel effet." — Havemeyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1908 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Stepman-De 
Messemaeker in 1914). Flowers double, hose-in-hose but not conspicuously so when 
fully expanded, frequently with 5 corollas, extra large; corolla-lobes curled; tone inter- 
mediate to pale; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous (xliv.) to Tourmaline Pink 
(xxxviii.) ; when expanded, the outer corollas Lilac, the inner corollas Mauvette (xxv.) 
to white. Clusters large, compact, heavy, pyramidal, showy. The flowers appear 
to be darker without than within. 

Julien Gerardin Lemoine, Cat. no. 190, 24 (1916), "Compact thyrses of large, full 
and imbricated flowers, bright cobalt blue, a very rare shade among Lilacs." — Have- 
meyer in Gard. Mag. xxv. 233 (1917). 

Introduced in 1916 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (plant received from T. A. Havemeyer, Glen 
Head, N. Y., in October, 1918; no. 7935 Am. Arb.). Flowers double, large; corolla- 
lobes rounded or pointed at apex; tone pale; color in bud Deep Purplish Vinaceous to 
Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) ; when expanded Pale Vinaceous-Lilac tinged with Light Vina- 
ceous-Lilac without, Pale Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) tinged with Argyle Purple (xxxvn.) 
to white tinged with Verbena Violet (xxxvi.) within. Clusters compact, densely filled, 
broad at base. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 190. 

Justii Hort. according to Kirchner in Petzold and Kirchner, Arb. Muscav. 495 (1864), 
"Mit schonen, langen, lockeren blassrothen, grossblumigen Bluthenrispen," and as 
Just's Flieder. — Regel, Russ. Dendr. 207 (1870), as Josti. — Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 
142 (1880), and as Lilas commun de Just. — Dieck, Haupt-Cat. Zoschen, 78 (1885), as 
Justi. — Hartwig, 111. Geholzb. 380 (1892), "Knospe rotviolett," as Justi. 

Appears as a name only in various catalogues: Simon-Louis, 1886-1887, 58. — Spath, 
no. 69, 115 (1887-1888), as Justi. — Muskauer Baumschulen, Haupt-Katalog, 1910, 37. 

Klinge (Holzgew. Est-, Liv- und Curland, 24, 1883) lists as a name only under 
S. vulgaris q. hybrida hort., od[er] Ambfroise] Verschaffelt a form Josti which he notes 
is cultivated at St. Petersburg. This is undoubtedly a misnomer. 

Notes on plant in Arnold Arboretum (grown from cuttings taken June 4, 1895, from 
plant received from Spath in January, 1888; no. 2927-1 Am. Arb.). Flowers single, 
large, symmetrical; corolla-lobes narrow, pointed at apex, slightly cucullate on first ex- 



318 THE LILAC 

panding; anthers visible but deep-set; tone intermediate to pale; color in bud Deep 
Purplish Vinaceous to Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.); when expanded Purplish Lilac with 
margins of Light Pinkish Lilac (xxxvu.) without, Pale Mauve (xxv.) with markings of 
white at throat within. Clusters narrow, compact, medium size. 

Kate Harlin Kanzleiter in Gartenwelt, xin. 129, t. fig. 3 (1909), "Kate Harlin, eben- 
falls einfach, ist von vornehmen Alabasterweiss. Die einzelnen Bliiten sind auffallend 
gross und stehen in gleichmassiger Entfernung auseinander, so dass die Rispen ein ele- 
gantes, leichtes Aussehen erhalten. Durch diese grazios und gleichmassig gebauten 
Rispen kommt jede einzelne Blume zur vollen Geltung, auch werden die Blumen nicht 
rostig, was bei der weissen Farbung ein grosser Vorteil ist und diese Sorte fiir die Zukunft 
als wertvolle Schnittblume erscheinen lasst." — Pfitzer, Hauptkatalog, 1910. 

Mr. Paul Pfitzer wrote me on November 7, 1924, that this form was the result of a 
crossing made by his grandfather Mr. Wilhelm Pfitzer, in his private garden at Stuttgart. 
It was chosen when in flower from among many other seedlings, then transplanted and 
carefully observed for years. Mr. Pfitzer was aided in its choice by several wellknown 
Lilac specialists. Mr. Paul Pfitzer tells me that it first appeared in the firm's Haupt- 
katalog for 1 910 which I have not seen. 

Notes on plant in Dept. of Parks, Rochester, N. Y. (received from Stepman-De 
Messemaeker in 1914). Flowers single, large; corolla-lobes broad, cucullate, saucer- 
shaped; corolla-tube long, slender; color in bud Absinthe Green to Deep Sea-foam Green 
(xxxi.); when expanded between Sea-foam Green (xxxi.) and white; the color is never 
a pure white. Clusters well-filled, large, long, showy. 

Katherine Havemeyer Lemoine, Cat. no. 196, 19 (1922), "Large and compact panicles, 
enormous flowers of the most perfect shape, with broad imbricated lobes, cobalt lilac 
flushed mauve, certainly one of the handsomest double Lilacs." 

Introduced in 1922 by the firm of V. Lemoine et fils, Nancy, France, and one of their 
productions. Named for Mrs. T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, N. Y. 

Notes on plant at Moreau Delano's, Orange, N. J. (received from T. A. Havemeyer, 
Glen Head, N. Y., in 1924). Flowers semi-double to double, large; corolla-lobes broad, 
rounded or pointed at apex; tone pale; color in bud Light Vinaceous-Lilac (xliv.) to 
Purplish Lilac (xxxvu.) ; when expanded Pale Lobelia Violet tinged with Purplish Lilac 
without, white tinged with Pale Lobelia Violet (xxxvu.) within. Clusters interrupted, 
medium to large in size, broad-pyramidal. Leaves are frequently present at the base 
of the subdivisions of the inflorescence. 

I have seen only the English edition of Lemoine's catalogue no. 196. 

On a plant of this form growing in the collection of T. A. Havemeyer, Glen Head, 
N. Y., the clusters appeared too compact and crowded for real beauty. 

Koenig Johann Baudriller, Cat. no. 43, 142 (1880), name only, and as Lilas commun 
Roi Jean. 

It is possible that this is a corresponding name for the Lilac Erzherzog Johann. 

Mr. Rehder suggests that it may have been named in honor of Konig Johann von 
Sachsen. 

Konigin Luise Pfitzer, Cat. 192 1, "Ausdem grossen Sortiment der Flieder hebt sich 
diese herrliche Neuheit besonders hervor. Seit mehr als 10 Jahren wurde diese Sorte in 



SYRINGA VULGARIS 319 

meinen Kulturen ausprobiert und fiir gut befunden, dem Handel iibergeben zu werden. 
An Grosse der Dolden und Bliihwilligkeit iibertrifft sie die alte bekannte Sorte Marie 
Legraye. Als Treibfiieder ist sie von grosster Zukunft, da ihr grosser Vorteil in der 
absolut sicheren Treibfahigkeit liegt. Die grossen, iippig vollen Blutenrispen sind vom 
reinsten Weiss, der Wuchs der Pfianze ist sehr kraftig und gedrungen. Durch ihre 
vorzuglichen Eigenschaften wird sich 'Konigin Luise' bald iiberall einen ersten Platz 
erringen und behaupten." — H. Gehringer in Moller's Deutsch. Gartn.-Zeit. xxxvi. 
16 (1921). 

In a letter of November 7, 1924, Mr. Paul Pfitzer informed me that this was raised by 
his grandfather Mr. Wilhelm Pfitzer, in his private garden at Stuttgart, and was selected 
from among other seedlings on May 20, 1900. I have not seen the firm's catalogue for 
1 92 1 and the description there contained was sent me by Mr. Paul Pfitzer. 

Lamarck Lemoine, Cat. no. 104, 16 (1886), "Thyrses de plus de 20 centimetres; 
fleurs larges de 2 centimetres, formees de 3 ou 4 corolles emboitees et souvent disposees 
par etages; lilas bleuatre passant au rose quand on va de l'interi